Panasonic FF L-mount Cine camera coming

[currensheldon]

From all the interviews I'v watched, definitely seems there are some big features not  yet announced. 6K and Anamorphic are not the only BIG features the S1H has over the S1. Every Panasonic rep has said this and done a bit of "wink wink," wonder what that vent is for, etc etc - it's going to have some other big features (IBIS, internal raw, compressed raw, NDs, something...) and they are just holding back so that when they fully announce the specs (probably early September or so), they have some more headline-grabbing features. Especially since that will be around the time the Sony A7sIII is announced. 

But we definitely don't know yet what this camera can fully do, but we can be sure it will have quite a few more powerful features to differentiate it from the competition and warrant its $4000 price tag. 

I will say that if there is one place Panasonic always delivers, it's in value for money - from Varicam LT vs Sony F5/F55/C700 to EVA-1 vs C200/FS7/C300 and, even though everyone says it's too expensive, the S1 (with free firmware forthcoming) vs any other mirrorless/DLSR camera out there. 

[thebrothersthre3]

1 hour ago, ade towell said:

I was referring to the SH1 doing 10 bit 422 internal. No other camera in its class does 4k 60p 10 bit 422 internal

I've just got an XT3, wonderful camera for its price, have not tested 4k 50p at 400mb for long periods, how long do you think you could record before it overheats? AM curious

I’ve never had it overheat. I think it only does up to 200mbps at 4K 60. It just gets very warm. It has a 30 minute record limit I believe. 

[sanveer]

20 minutes ago, currensheldon said:

From all the interviews I'v watched, definitely seems there are some big features not  yet announced. 6K and Anamorphic are not the only BIG features the S1H has over the S1. Every Panasonic rep has said this and done a bit of "wink wink," wonder what that vent is for, etc etc - it's going to have some other big features (IBIS, internal raw, compressed raw, NDs, something...) and they are just holding back so that when they fully announce the specs (probably early September or so), they have some more headline-grabbing features. Especially since that will be around the time the Sony A7sIII is announced. 

But we definitely don't know yet what this camera can fully do, but we can be sure it will have quite a few more powerful features to differentiate it from the competition and warrant its $4000 price tag. 

I will say that if there is one place Panasonic always delivers, it's in value for money - from Varicam LT vs Sony F5/F55/C700 to EVA-1 vs C200/FS7/C300 and, even though everyone says it's too expensive, the S1 (with free firmware forthcoming) vs any other mirrorless/DLSR camera out there. 

I also think Panasonic are hiding festured, which they will activate with firmware, as other cameras (mostly the A7siii) are released. Right now what they've released us not worth the extra money, especially since it still has a crop in 4k60p, it could still apparently have heating issues (they seem to have made this up), and 6k and anamorphic don't seem to command the extra $1500 over the S1. Their dynamic range should be the same.

I am guessing they could unlock faster frame rates, maybe 12-bit 422 or something, and maybe even windowed 4k at 120fps? Right now the feature set seems slightly underwhelming, especially compared to the S1. 

[thebrothersthre3]

I don't think Panasonic will disappoint, unless it ends up being another GH5S type deal. At least with that you had an entirely different sensor and huge low light performance increase.

I'd love to see 12 bit 422 in some type of compressed format H254 would be fine. I don't see why that couldn't at least be available in 2k. 4K 120fps would be huge as well.

I mean if it has 4k 120fps its an instant buy for me.

[currensheldon]

21 minutes ago, sanveer said:

I also think Panasonic are hiding festures, which they will activate with firmware, as other cameras (mostly the A7siii) are released. Right now what they've released us not worth the extra money, especially since it still has a crop in 4k60p, it could still apparently have heating issues (they seem to have made this up), and 6k and anamorphic don't seem to command the extra $1500 over the S1. Their dynamic range should be the same.

I am guessing they could unlock faster frame rates, maybe 12-bit 422 or something, and maybe even windowed 4k at 120fps? Right now the feature set seems slightly underwhelming, especially compared to the S1. 

I agree. Just like with the S1, Panasonic has built a body that can and will be able to handle heavier loads in the future. So while Sony will surely have to start from scratch to match even the 10-bit, 60fps S1 specs with the A7sIII body, Panasonic has already built a larger body with a vent and cooling system for even more intensive work loads than the S1 - the S1H. 

Which means we'll see at least 10-bit 4K All-I 400mbps, probably in 60p as well, plus the 6K already announced (hopefully in 10-bit H265 or compressed raw) and any other firmware updates they want to throw in there as competitors release their own high-end video hybrids - their system is already built for future processing loads. 

 

[wolf33d]

On 6/1/2019 at 2:39 AM, Mattias Burling said:

The EOS-R isn't perfect but it has no rolling shutter, biggest and most affordable lens lineup in the world, built in ND, stabilization, c-log, high bitrate, great audio, seamless transition between photo and video, and of course a great stills camera built in. 

Until another company releases a camera in the same range to replace it I don't have much choice but to use the awful Canon..

I laughed so hard. Especially the no rolling shutter part, deserves an award!

That Canon is the worst piece of junk I have ever tried. If you have no choice but using that camera we definitely don’t live in the same world, and I am thankful for that!

[Mattias Burling]

1 hour ago, wolf33d said:

I laughed so hard. Especially the no rolling shutter part, deserves an award!

That Canon is the worst piece of junk I have ever tried. If you have no choice but using that camera we definitely don’t live in the same world, and I am thankful for that!

Lol, I thought I had you on my ignore list already.. let me fix that..

[Skip77]

8K camera from Nikon at Apple event............

https://www.techradar.com/news/did-apple-just-blow-the-lid-on-a-new-nikon-8k-camera

[Skip77]

Or this.............I want one.

 

[webrunner5]

10 hours ago, Skip77 said:

Or this.............I want one.

 

You apparently have never seen the stupid ass rig they had to use to make it happen. That thing has been around for years.

https://***URL not allowed***/canon-8k-cinema-camera-first-official-footage/

 

[The Department Of Wow]

Can someone please explain to me why all the new VIDEO features these days make their debut in DSLRs... and then tend to migrate toward video style cameras?

Still cameras are/were purpose built for one type of usage, (though I could argue holding one is still not ergonomic as the hand is forced forward at the wrist)  holding and rigging while the modern digital cinema camera layout has evolved mostly from ENG style because everything is where one would expect it and is just so much better to operate and work with without the need to rig a small awkward DSLR body out for this.... for example the ever useful top handle, zoom control handle in natural ergonomic position, ND filters and xlr inputs to mention a few. And a long camera doest require as much stabilization.

 Lens coverage need no longer be an issue and new full frame lenses are released constantly now.

Why don't all the big makers (canon sort of tries to) simply make two body choices with essentially the same guts?

Please someone give me an answer that makes real pro and marketing sense.

[Trek of Joy]

14 minutes ago, The Department Of Wow said:

Can someone please explain to me why all the new VIDEO features these days make their debut in DSLRs... and then tend to migrate toward video style cameras?

Still cameras are/were purpose built for one type of usage, (though I could argue holding one is still not ergonomic as the hand is forced forward at the wrist)  holding and rigging while the modern digital cinema camera layout has evolved mostly from ENG style because everything is where one would expect it and is just so much better to operate and work with without the need to rig a small awkward DSLR body out for this.... for example the ever useful top handle, zoom control handle in natural ergonomic position, ND filters and xlr inputs to mention a few. And a long camera doest require as much stabilization.

 Lens coverage need no longer be an issue and new full frame lenses are released constantly now.

Why don't all the big makers (canon sort of tries to) simply make two body choices with essentially the same guts?

Please someone give me an answer that makes real pro and marketing sense.

Because photo/video hybrids sell in numbers many times greater than dedicated video cameras, and get far more coverage than something like a Varicam or EOS Cinema camera. Plus the two worlds have been converging for quite some time, its a natural progression. If you shoot stills and video, in many cases carrying two different kits really makes no sense these days. With the S1R/H combo, you have both bases covered and there's easy backup/B-cam capabilities with each.

I just worked with a a couple guys from the Matador Network, one was carrying a FS5/28-135 for video and a 1dx plus the f/2.8 zoom trinity for stills. The other had the a73 and a few GM lenses, plus a Ronin S mostly for video, but also grabbing stills. I know which kit I'd rather carry. 

If Panasonic had a competent AF system, I'd be all-in on the L-mount since I fall into the photo/video camp. As it stands I'm waiting to see what Sony does with the a7s3 before doing anything, since the various E-mount bodies serve my needs well.

Chris

[Skip77]

53 minutes ago, The Department Of Wow said:

Can someone please explain to me why all the new VIDEO features these days make their debut in DSLRs... and then tend to migrate toward video style cameras?

Still cameras are/were purpose built for one type of usage, (though I could argue holding one is still not ergonomic as the hand is forced forward at the wrist)  holding and rigging while the modern digital cinema camera layout has evolved mostly from ENG style because everything is where one would expect it and is just so much better to operate and work with without the need to rig a small awkward DSLR body out for this.... for example the ever useful top handle, zoom control handle in natural ergonomic position, ND filters and xlr inputs to mention a few. And a long camera doest require as much stabilization.

 Lens coverage need no longer be an issue and new full frame lenses are released constantly now.

Why don't all the big makers (canon sort of tries to) simply make two body choices with essentially the same guts?

Please someone give me an answer that makes real pro and marketing sense.

Why? 

Two different bodies means it's not a hybrid and they can do video and stills really well. The super fast A9 does great looking video, etc, etc. 

The day it happened and Canon introduced good video in a DSLR it was all over. We can't go back.

[thebrothersthre3]

1 hour ago, The Department Of Wow said:

Can someone please explain to me why all the new VIDEO features these days make their debut in DSLRs... and then tend to migrate toward video style cameras?

Still cameras are/were purpose built for one type of usage, (though I could argue holding one is still not ergonomic as the hand is forced forward at the wrist)  holding and rigging while the modern digital cinema camera layout has evolved mostly from ENG style because everything is where one would expect it and is just so much better to operate and work with without the need to rig a small awkward DSLR body out for this.... for example the ever useful top handle, zoom control handle in natural ergonomic position, ND filters and xlr inputs to mention a few. And a long camera doest require as much stabilization.

 Lens coverage need no longer be an issue and new full frame lenses are released constantly now.

Why don't all the big makers (canon sort of tries to) simply make two body choices with essentially the same guts?

Please someone give me an answer that makes real pro and marketing sense.

I think its because all these new features are more geared towards the prosumer and run and gun market. People in a professional setting tend to see cameras as just tools. I think its geeks like the people on here, me included, that are cumming over every new release. 

For someone like myself who is often doing 3 jobs at once shooting with a 2 person crew, these type of advances are automatically useful for me. 

In a professional setting you are shooting on say a RED or Arri, all kitted out. You have a 1st AC pulling focus. That type of system has been in place for a long time. I think that's why you hear people saying, auto focus is useless if you are a professional. Why fix what isn't broken. 

Of course when people actually use new tech and discover that you can do a three man job with just one guy that starts to change things. 

[The Department Of Wow]

2 hours ago, Trek of Joy said:

Because photo/video hybrids sell in numbers many times greater than dedicated video cameras, and get far more coverage than something like a Varicam or EOS Cinema camera. Plus the two worlds have been converging for quite some time, its a natural progression. If you shoot stills and video, in many cases carrying two different kits really makes no sense these days. With the S1R/H combo, you have both bases covered and there's easy backup/B-cam capabilities with each.

I just worked with a a couple guys from the Matador Network, one was carrying a FS5/28-135 for video and a 1dx plus the f/2.8 zoom trinity for stills. The other had the a73 and a few GM lenses, plus a Ronin S mostly for video, but also grabbing stills. I know which kit I'd rather carry. 

If Panasonic had a competent AF system, I'd be all-in on the L-mount since I fall into the photo/video camp. As it stands I'm waiting to see what Sony does with the a7s3 before doing anything, since the various E-mount bodies serve my needs well.

Chris

Thanks Chris, I appreciate your, and all the other thoughtful comments.

I get the niche here that thebrothersthre3 mentions, after all it's the eos forum. I've been a camera geek for a long time and have a large collection of all ages and kinds. most are things of beauty... except for the plastic stuff with microscopic buttons and menus from the past 20 or so years which barely got used before being replaced by the next best thing - DSLRs and HDV etc.

I understand these cameras form the majority of profits for these companies and offer the flexibility of shooting both stills and video - although we are quickly approaching resolutions that offer a 4k+ frame grab sufficing for a photo - depending. I started as an assistant photographer, became a photographer and mostly shot medium format and have used them all. I then became a commercial director and have used all the great cameras along the way (even owned a 435 package) and forced to sometimes shoot on video... back in the day... we all knew the main problem was interlacing and sensor size. Those problems have been addressed along with many others and color space is really getting there. I rode the DSLR wave, but didn't try to bring that to anything serious as it just isn't built for it. Occasionally only if a super small camera was needed for some reason. I've had many chuckles watching the proliferation of cheap gear suddenly available to bolt on and  "build" these DSLRs into cinema style rigs... often just as large... scratches head. Arri got it right and as soon as they could ditch the mags and add the sound - moved to the ENG style. It almost feels to me that there is a generation of videographers who grew up on DSLR form factor and have never thought to try anything else.

But Skip77 is right and the 5D was the inflection point.

 I love wonderful production design and deeply crafting an image, however recently I had to do a small documentary job in Paris with lots of interviews and run and gun street stuff, and shoot it myself, traveling with just one other writer, so I had to be very self contained. I chose to rent two of these small newer 1 inch cameras I think they were Canon FC405 or something like that. Cheap consumer crap... BUT, actually perfect for this job. Never had to dig for a lens, used the hell out of all 4 of the ND filters, the really good auto focus and always had great mics plugged directly in. I did all the research, talked to my AC and DP geeks who tended to always want to over complicate it.

I guess this sensor is somewhere between full frame and APSC but Low light performance was weak and there supports my argument to just put the DSLR guts into this form factor. If they actually ever made one with a great build quality (the old JVC GYHD ?? series made of metal with everything laid out logically comes to mind) they could just offer basically the "VIDEO" version of these new twin pairs of cameras in a form factor that is friendly to video instead of these outwardly identical R or S or whatever... it's just confusing. Imagine if you have both in your bag.

That's what I thought Canon would do as they were launching the C - series... but they should have kept price (and sensor) identical to the 5D at the time. Everyone would have bought it. I guess Black Magic is the only one really trying to fill that space, but for whatever reason... I've never used one either. 

I'm not actually sure which kit of those two you mention you'd rather carry. I mean weight is just one consideration... and a big one for this Paris job, but usually much lower on my list. Any job with at least one AC mitigates that for anything but remote adventure. But if you mean needing to respond and react quickly... I don't know what could beat these tiny ENG style cameras. Like most of these kinds of problems... it's about marketing and tiering and not really building the ultimate tool... because that might last for a few years. 

 

[Video Hummus]

2 hours ago, The Department Of Wow said:

But if you mean needing to respond and react quickly... I don't know what could beat these tiny ENG style cameras. Like most of these kinds of problems... it's about marketing and tiering and not really building the ultimate tool... because that might last for a few years. 

Maybe @webrunner5 could provide more context for the perceived fall in the lower end ENG cameras.

Its marketing and changing markets. I think a lot of photographers had to start diversifying and offering video services too. And well, when canon made the 5Dm2 then it was like AC in cars. People just expect it as a standard feature now.

[webrunner5]

1 hour ago, Video Hummus said:

Maybe @webrunner5 could provide more context for the perceived fall in the lower end ENG cameras.

Its marketing and changing markets. I think a lot of photographers had to start diversifying and offering video services too. And well, when canon made the 5Dm2 then it was like AC in cars. People just expect it as a standard feature now.

Well I am sort of out of the loop now as they say, but I have talked to a few people in the local TV industry as of late and for Broadcast they have not given up on ENG cameras. Now they have went to some smaller ones, by that like 12, to 14  pound ones instead of the old 20, to 22 pound ones. I think a lot of it is better, lighter batteries for one, and miniaturization of electronic components. Now that is for 2 person interviews. The typical cameraman and a reporter with a mike in hand. On the solo reporting, getting more common, only have to pay one person, they have went to the really small camcorders, Sony JVC, Panasonic all make them, they are called ENG but they are not shoulder mount useful, tripod or hand held mostly. using 3, 1/3 CCDs in them, some maybe 1/2" and they are like 6 to 8 pounds, and cost like 4 to 8 thousand dollars.

At local Pro sporting events around here, Baseball, Football, Soccer they are using the smaller ENG cameras, on field and off, and on the side lines they, the teams, use the small camcorders mostly. At all the big name sports stuff they still use the huge ENG camera bodies with Box 75x or better lenses on them.

Broadcast Has to use the 3 CCD sensor cameras to get true 3 color separation, 4.4.4.4 is critical for all the equipment to be close to as perfect as they can get them. You don't want people to see different colors day to day and think their TV is screwy lol. And you don't want the reporters and news crew to look like aliens either. I just don't see 3 CCD cameras going away anytime soon in Broadcast. Now true some, well a lot lately are smaller sensors now, but 3 of them none the less.

But I have heard of some Newspaper reporters now using Smartphones here in the USA. But they don't requires the resolution in a newspaper spread like a TV station needs. But it probably is coming down the road. Smartphones are advancing at a rapid pace. Faster than real cameras are.

[Skip77]

Lot's of issues with video abilities in the smaller camera bodies and the biggest is heat generated by the processor inside the camera. People don't understand this unless they've used a cine camera. If a camera came out with no video features and was a pro photography camera the internet would go nuts. 

[Lars Steenhoff]

13 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

Well I am sort of out of the loop now as they say, but I have talked to a few people in the local TV industry as of late and for Broadcast they have not given up on ENG cameras. Now they have went to some smaller ones, by that like 12, to 14  pound ones instead of the old 20, to 22 pound ones. I think a lot of it is better, lighter batteries for one, and miniaturization of electronic components. Now that is for 2 person interviews. The typical cameraman and a reporter with a mike in hand. On the solo reporting, getting more common, only have to pay one person, they have went to the really small camcorders, Sony JVC, Panasonic all make them, they are called ENG but they are not shoulder mount useful, tripod or hand held mostly. using 3, 1/3 CCDs in them, some maybe 1/2" and they are like 6 to 8 pounds, and cost like 4 to 8 thousand dollars.

At local Pro sporting events around here, Baseball, Football, Soccer they are using the smaller ENG cameras, on field and off, and on the side lines they, the teams, use the small camcorders mostly. At all the big name sports stuff they still use the huge ENG camera bodies with Box 75x or better lenses on them.

Broadcast Has to use the 3 CCD sensor cameras to get true 3 color separation, 4.4.4.4 is critical for all the equipment to be close to as perfect as they can get them. You don't want people to see different colors day to day and think their TV is screwy lol. And you don't want the reporters and news crew to look like aliens either. I just don't see 3 CCD cameras going away anytime soon in Broadcast. Now true some, well a lot lately are smaller sensors now, but 3 of them none the less.

But I have heard of some Newspaper reporters now using Smartphones here in the USA. But they don't requires the resolution in a newspaper spread like a TV station needs. But it probably is coming down the road. Smartphones are advancing at a rapid pace. Faster than real cameras are.

Nobody will think the tv is screwed when they are watching from day to day, because they have no memory reference from the day before. most people are not even aware of the difference between hdr and sdr without comparing them side by side.

[webrunner5]

19 minutes ago, Lars Steenhoff said:

Nobody will think the tv is screwed when they are watching from day to day, because they have no memory reference from the day before. most people are not even aware of the difference between hdr and sdr without comparing them side by side.

Yeah but if the studio people turn green they might Think the Martians have landed is the trouble. Think The Day the Earth Stood still stuff.  klaatu barada nikto ?