JVC is back with a new cinema camera!!

[Cliff Totten]

One of THE most important questions is;  Who's sensor is going in this thing. Everything starts with a great image sensor. If JVC can buy Sony sensors, right off the bat they will have a camera that wipes out BlackMagic's super35 cameras.

[Mokara]

4 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

Yeah but unless any of the cameras have a Global Shutter the Rolling Shutter in FF would be a no go for me. That is the big advantage of 1", m4/3 sensors, even the 3 CCD ones.

And so far if a camera that has a GS in it it is a dog in low light. So that is not so hot either. I am sure they can improve that with faster processors, readouts on the sensors..

Rolling shutter has nothing to do with sensor size. Sensor resolution perhaps, but the physical size of the sensor is irrelevant.

[webrunner5]

Hmm I disagree. The larger the sensor the more time it takes to read the entire sensor. Global Shutter reads it all at once. It takes a processor from hell to read a MF sensor, that is why they are the worst of the bunch.

[Laurier]

1 hour ago, Cliff Totten said:

One of THE most important questions is;  Who's sensor is going in this thing. Everything starts with a great image sensor. If JVC can buy Sony sensors, right off the bat they will have a camera that wipes out BlackMagic's super35 cameras.

Blackmagic already use a sony sensor on the pocket 4k I believe.

But honestly what more can people want ? I just ordered a G2, spec and IQ wise it sit between a red and an alexa mini , all for a lot less money.
JVC can buy a sony sensor, but that do not mean you will get good motion performance, a good raw codec , internal ND or colors and all the connections.

If you look at what they are doing with the 8k M4/3 camera, that still very far from a Pocket 4k in term of potential professional use.

[IronFilm]

19 hours ago, Alt Shoo said:

In regards to marketing, it makes sense as well because that’s where most of these companies are leaning, especially Sharp another unfashionable company. It also ensures a longer camera life if it is “future durable”. The market is moving fast and I think it’ll be a lost for JVC, not to participate in the strategies other companies such as Sony and Panasonic are diving in.

4K will still relevant for a long long loooooong time yet, and I'd rather JVC is price competitive rather than bumping up the cost even higher with a 6K camera.

[Andrew Reid]

11 hours ago, Mokara said:

Rolling shutter has nothing to do with sensor size. Sensor resolution perhaps, but the physical size of the sensor is irrelevant.

Not entirely irrelevant. Larger sensors tend to be higher res = more data to read. Larger sensors also tend to generate more heat, and that has to be managed very well to get readout noise under control, and fixed pattern noise.

So we tend to see the smaller sensors being the faster ones, with less rolling shutter. 1", M43 good examples of that.

[IronFilm]

18 hours ago, Kisaha said:

Also, I believe the market here are people buying 1/3,2/3,1" camcorders, anything more will be just heavenly to them and ,maybe, good enough for some of us.

Must of JVC's existing market is people buying 1" or much smaller camcorders, simply keeping on having S35 is already a big big leap forward for them. 

 

17 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

In answer to "why was the LS300 overlooked by so many users?", I think this interaction that I've just seen on Twitter might be quite informative

 

In fairness, JVC did show two different versions of it that year but I definitely think the fact it had an MFT mount has certainly clouded the message regarding it NOT having an MFT sensor.

 

HOLY BLOODY CRAPPY-O ROONEY!!!  Did Newsshooter of all places in the world just say that JVC never made a S35 4K camera???????????

Wow. Wow. Just WOW!

If even Newsshooter (a site I highly respect, right up there with EOSHD.com!) is utterly clueless, then no wonder the great unwashed masses is up a shit creek without a paddle when it comes to being informed about JVC. 

[IronFilm]

14 hours ago, Sanka said:

Thanks a lot for sharing the survey link. This is a great opportunity. I own a JVC LS-300 and I love it. A better quality  camera of that type with a better screen and (very important) a simpler and more logical menu would be a great and unique C4K camera with XLR, BNC, internal ND filter...

The association of a S35 sensor with M43 mount is an amazing feature, as I discovered  that many M43 lenses are able (or almost able) to cover the S35 sensor size, widening everything... 

Voigtlander 17.5 mm, 25 mm and Panasonic 42.5 mm f/1.2 are among them

And with a speedbooster and FX lenses, you get that "Full Frame" look on demand.

No camera on the market are offering such a flexibility from S16 crop view at 120 fps ( I am using my vintage Cine Nikkor tiny lenses), M43 convenient compactness to FF look. 

Make sure you answer that survey, explaining yourself as a LS300 owner and the benefits you enjoy of MFT! :-)

 

[RWR]

The LS300 "zoom" on prime lens feature would be good to keep.

[webrunner5]

3 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Make sure you answer that survey, explaining yourself as a LS300 owner and the benefits you enjoy of MFT! ?

 

Why, there are 70 million APS-C lenses out there that are cheap as hell. Give it up, it gets old. m4/3 is a dying mount. Olympus is just about done, and Panasonic is not going to support 3 mounts. It is suscide. A company would have to be crazy to go m4/3 long term production wise.

[newfoundmass]

8 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Why, there are 70 million APS-C lenses out there that are cheap as hell. Give it up, it gets old. m4/3 is a dying mount.

And they work wonderfully on a M43 camera.

It feels as though people have been claiming the M43 mount is dying for the last 6 or 7 years. Then came the GH4, the OG Pocket, the G85, the GH5, the Pocket 4K, etc. all cameras that have been wildly successful. 

As long as there is a demand there will be M43 cameras. 

[thebrothersthre3]

As long as you can use a speedbooster I'll be happy. 

[webrunner5]

If Olympus goes m4/3 will go and they are Not doing well as of late. They are on hardly anyone's radar as of late. The EM1 X is a non starter, just too much money, and the EM1 mk II is just too small of an upgrade over the original to be worth it in this day and age.

18 minutes ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

As long as you can use a speedbooster I'll be happy. 

And there are 150 million FF lenses out there, probably even more..

21 minutes ago, newfoundmass said:

And they work wonderfully on a M43 camera.

It feels as though people have been claiming the M43 mount is dying for the last 6 or 7 years. Then came the GH4, the OG Pocket, the G85, the GH5, the Pocket 4K, etc. all cameras that have been wildly successful. 

As long as there is a demand there will be M43 cameras. 

I doubt that many people have actually bought a GH5 when they cost 2000 dollars when new, and I doubt BMD has sold that many PK4's. Sure we buy them but how many outside of here do. Yeah maybe the G85 sold, but here in America there is NEVER a place that sells Olympus or Panasonic other than big box stores in New York. They don't even advertise here anymore. Most of the people that buy a Oly EM1 are birders, and how many of them are there. After a few years most Olympus camera bodies are discounted by the factory so much they nearly give them away. Hech look at the price of a new GH5 now. Hard to make money that way.

Hey personally I really like m4/3, but it seems most people don't, and so long term it is a dead duck.

[KnightsFan]

To take a step back, what the MFT proponents here want is an APS-C sensor they can adapt or speed boost. MFT and Sony E were the only two real mirrorless mounts up until recently, and Sony E was out because of patents. I don't think many people genuinely want MFT over, say, RF, L, or Z mounts if the legalities worked out and the corresponding adapters and speed boosters existed, which they don't--yet. I would personally love to see more companies join in with the L mount alliance. A standard mount across different brands would benefit consumers.

Another option is if JVC made it EF mount, but had an optional focal reducer fitted inside the mount, like what Luca does for Blackmagic cameras. There would be a couple disappointed people who really wanted to use FD or other short flange vintage glass, but overall that's a good solution, since EF is still widely popular. JVC already makes fixed lens cameras, so they have the capability/partners to make their own focal reducer.

And of course a FF sensor with EF is an option as well, if it doesn't balloon the cost. But hey, if Z Cam can make a $5k FF cinema camera, maybe JVC can?

Just brainstorming any viable solutions that don't include MFT. But none of them are likely to happen, so MFT really is the most likely mount that JVC would choose to allow speed boosting an APS-C sensor.

[Alt Shoo]

It’s not too known that JVC’s now defunct subsidiary company AltaSens created the sensor that is inside the LS300. Maybe JVC designs their own sensor again!

[thebrothersthre3]

29 minutes ago, KnightsFan said:

To take a step back, what the MFT proponents here want is an APS-C sensor they can adapt or speed boost. MFT and Sony E were the only two real mirrorless mounts up until recently, and Sony E was out because of patents. I don't think many people genuinely want MFT over, say, RF, L, or Z mounts if the legalities worked out and the corresponding adapters and speed boosters existed, which they don't--yet. I would personally love to see more companies join in with the L mount alliance. A standard mount across different brands would benefit consumers.

Another option is if JVC made it EF mount, but had an optional focal reducer fitted inside the mount, like what Luca does for Blackmagic cameras. There would be a couple disappointed people who really wanted to use FD or other short flange vintage glass, but overall that's a good solution, since EF is still widely popular. JVC already makes fixed lens cameras, so they have the capability/partners to make their own focal reducer.

And of course a FF sensor with EF is an option as well, if it doesn't balloon the cost. But hey, if Z Cam can make a $5k FF cinema camera, maybe JVC can?

Just brainstorming any viable solutions that don't include MFT. But none of them are likely to happen, so MFT really is the most likely mount that JVC would choose to allow speed boosting an APS-C sensor.

this

[Kisaha]

54 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

If Olympus goes m4/3 will go and they are Not doing well as of late. They are on hardly anyone's radar as of late. The EM1 X is a non starter, just too much money, and the EM1 mk II is just too small of an upgrade over the original to be worth it in this day and age.

And there are 150 million FF lenses out there, probably even more..

I doubt that many people have actually bought a GH5 when they cost 2000 dollars when new, and I doubt BMD has sold that many PK4's. Sure we buy them but how many outside of here do. Yeah maybe the G85 sold, but here in America there is NEVER a place that sells Olympus or Panasonic other than big box stores in New York. They don't even advertise here anymore. Most of the people that buy a Oly EM1 are birders, and how many of them are there. After a few years most Olympus camera bodies are discounted by the factory so much they nearly give them away. Hech look at the price of a new GH5 now. Hard to make money that way.

You are wrong in multiple levels!

Ofcourse I live in Europe, so I don't really have a clue about the US market, but here, everything you said in the above statement is false.

Olympus is very popular with the "hip" crowd here, also their representative is very aggresive with marketing and very reliable with service and repairs, unlike Sony and Panasonic. Most of the GH pro's here are buying Olympus lenses.

There are literally unlimited GH5 sold here and most bought at 1999€. Now, all these people are buying P4K cameras and keep their GH5 for run n gun and workhorse ones.

Yes, "we" buy those cameras, I do not think that BM wanted to sell the P4K to bakers or fishermen. "We", including the young generation are more than what "we" were 20 or 30 years ago. How many youngsters knew in the 80s and 90s doing videos and posting them on youtube? There are hundrends of thousands now.

Z is a sensor in a box and will cost 5000£€$. LS300 is a real workhorse camera, and it has to be less than 4000$€£ to be competitive. No full frame. No need, no sense.

[webrunner5]

53 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

 Now, all these people are buying P4K cameras and keep their GH5 for run n gun and workhorse ones.

Yes, "we" buy those cameras, I do not think that BM wanted to sell the P4K to bakers or fishermen. "We", including the young generation are more than what "we" were 20 or 30 years ago. How many youngsters knew in the 80s and 90s doing videos and posting them on youtube? There are hundrends of thousands now.

 

BM has not sold  thousands and thousands of Any camera. They are a drop in the bucket of overall cameras sales. Probably less than 1%. And 95% of YouTube stuff is done with Smartphones and Canon cameras. Even the big boys use a Canon for the sit down interview stuff because of DPAF.

And if you look at these graphs camera company's better find a new way to make money. It Ain't pretty this year.

http://www.cipa.jp/stats/documents/e/dw-201904_e.pdf

And if you go to page 16 of 75 for their finical report on the right you will see how piss poor Olympus is doing in this day and age for cameras. It is really bad..

 

https://www.olympus-global.com/ir/data/integratedreport/pdf/integrated_report_2018e_A3.pdf

 

[BTM_Pix]

I hope they do keep the MFT mount as one aspect that seldom gets mentioned about the LS300 (although I'm going to do it again verbatim here  ) is that if you want you can actually use an APS-C lens on a Speedbooster to make it faster and then use the VSM to crop back into it to counteract the vignetting.

So, for example, I have a Tamron 16-300mm all purpose travel zoom that is a bit slow at f3.5-f5.6 but on a Speedbooster it becomes a far healthier f2.8-f4 and I set the VSM to 85% to take out the vignetting.

Ditto for the Sigma ART 18-35mm f1.8 it becomes f1.2 and the VSM at 85% maintains its field of view as though it were on an APS-C camera.

[webrunner5]

Yeah but can you put a Speedbooster on it and make it work for FF lenses and actually have a FF field of view, DoF and all?