Olympus announces new firmware development to allow RAW video on the E-M1X and E-M1III

[IronFilm]

26 minutes ago, Video Hummus said:

Release a GH6 like everybody expects. Give it insane specs and decent price and it will be hard to ignore for anybody that has MFT lenses. HFR 6K and 4K modes. Something crazy like 6K120p or internal NDs. If they add PDAF in there then for sure it will be a huge hit. MFT or S35 sensor whatever gets the job done and still has IBIS or IBIS alternative (gyrobased digital stabilization or something better).

A Panasonic GH6 which is: a GH5S with IBIS + eND + 4K 120fps 10bit internal + raw output would be enough to set the world on fire. 

[IronFilm]

1 minute ago, John Matthews said:

Can someone please explain why 10 bit is needed? What situations? The only major benefit I've seen is banding in LOG profiles in 1080p. On my Olympus, I never see it in 4k.Am I missing something?

You can't push an image around too much in post if you're stuck with 8bit. 

[John Matthews]

3 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

You can't push an image around too much in post if you're stuck with 8bit. 

So, can I have some perspective? If pushing an image 100% is doing something crazy like changing all reds to greens (with clean results), 50% is adding 2 LUTs, 25% is adding 1 LUT and some color correction, 10% is color correction only, and 0% is out-of-camera results. Where is 8 bit, 10 bit, and RAW?

[fuzzynormal]

1 hour ago, IronFilm said:

You can't push an image around too much in post if you're stuck with 8bit. 

I try to solve this issue by not shooting images that need pushing around too much in post.

[sanveer]

11 hours ago, Brian Williams said:

It’s on the product page for the camera as well as every review, the clean hdmi output is 8bit; not saying this couldn’t change in the future, maybe they could change this in a firmware update, but wasn’t mentioned and I doubt they’d bother adding it if they are focusing on Ninja V raw output.

Thanks for the revert. I am guessing it was an artificial (software) limitation, pehaps due to the Sony Sensor Purchase Agreement. Either PDAF or good video, not both. So PDAF. 

[Marcio Kabke Pinheiro]

8 hours ago, IronFilm said:

A Panasonic GH6 which is: a GH5S with IBIS + eND + 4K 120fps 10bit internal + raw output would be enough to set the world on fire. 

Problem is that the "H" in "GH" is from "Hybrid", AFAIK. Albeit focused in video, the tradition it is that it would be a good stills camera too. That's why they derived it with the S.

Maybe they keep the tradition and make the GH6 with the 41mp sensor with 8k30 or 8k60, and your GH5s above to clash with the A7SIII. It would be a good solution - the question is if Panasonic really wants to invest to develop two models.

[John Matthews]

28 minutes ago, sanveer said:

Thanks for the revert. I am guessing it was an artificial (software) limitation, pehaps due to the Sony Sensor Purchase Agreement. Either PDAF or good video, not both. So PDAF. 

If this is true, it's a sad state of affaires. Personally, I doubt they'd impose that sort of thing- a highly monopolistic move. And why would Sony say it's fine for Fuji, Nikon, and Canon? Would they actually be THAT scared of MFT? I think Panasonic has invested too much in their contrast system that they can't turn back. How much does it cost to the customer to put PDAF on a sensor anyway? 100 Euros? I'd pay it! What are they doing?

[sanveer]

56 minutes ago, John Matthews said:

If this is true, it's a sad state of affaires. Personally, I doubt they'd impose that sort of thing- a highly monopolistic move. And why would Sony say it's fine for Fuji, Nikon, and Canon? Would they actually be THAT scared of MFT? I think Panasonic has invested too much in their contrast system that they can't turn back. How much does it cost to the customer to put PDAF on a sensor anyway? 100 Euros? I'd pay it! What are they doing?

Well said. PDAF or Laser+ToF autofocus can't be that expensive. Unless Sony is afraid the PDAF is going to destroy their market dominance, so it can not be acquired, regardless. 

[Video Hummus]

5 hours ago, John Matthews said:

I think Panasonic has invested too much in their contrast system that they can't turn back. How much does it cost to the customer to put PDAF on a sensor anyway? 100 Euros? I'd pay it! What are they doing?

I don’t think so. I think they’ve invested so much in DfD because they have no other good alternative. DfD doesn’t require any technology licensing from Sony Semi Conductor for on chip phase photosites or any other hardware based thing. It’s purely image processing from ground up.

I think with the S5 if you look at direct comparisons to the S1 and S1H they have actually done a remarkable job at reducing the pulsing side effect of a contrast based system. The tracking algorithms are much improved too.

So I think it has been a evolution of a “we have no choice” to “with DfD we can make contrast based autofocus workable” to “with new object recognition and 3D object estimation and DfD we might have one of the best systems someday”.

There is nothing stoping Panasonic from developing algorithms that mimic what the hardware based PDAF photosites are doing (that is using trigonometry to measure distance from subject) by building a depth map from image data and tracking objects in the space and reducing the need to do the contrast pulse to figure out what direction and how far to focus.

I really don’t think Panasonic would ignore the hordes of their users asking for PDAF or something similar for years now. 

[John Matthews]

16 minutes ago, Video Hummus said:

I don’t think so. I think they’ve invested so much in DfD because they have no other good alternative. DfD doesn’t require any technology licensing from Sony Semi Conductor for on chip phase photosites or any other hardware based thing. It’s purely image processing from ground up.

I think with the S5 if you look at direct comparisons to the S1 and S1H they have actually done a remarkable job at reducing the pulsing side effect of a contrast based system. The tracking algorithms are much improved too.

So I think it has been a evolution of a “we have no choice” to “with DfD we can make contrast based autofocus workable” to “with new object recognition and 3D object estimation and DfD we might have one of the best systems someday”.

There is nothing stoping Panasonic from developing algorithms that mimic what the hardware based PDAF photosites are doing (that is using trigonometry to measure distance from subject) by building a depth map from image data and tracking objects in the space and reducing the need to do the contrast pulse to figure out what direction and how far to focus.

I really don’t think Panasonic would ignore the hordes of their users asking for PDAF or something similar for years now. 

I've heard about DFD tech forever...incremental upgrades..."now it's a viable option"... blah...blah...blah...except it isn't PDAF and doesn't work nearly as well FOR VIDEO. For photography, it's great!

I'll tell you this: if the GH6 doesn't have PDAF, we'll really know about the intentions of Panasonic to let go of MFT or not. It's THE spec that EVERYONE is going to care about, regardless how good they make DFD or repackage it and call it something else. No one is listening anymore IMO. Just pay the piper and pass it on to the customer.

 

[newfoundmass]

2 hours ago, John Matthews said:

I've heard about DFD tech forever...incremental upgrades..."now it's a viable option"... blah...blah...blah...except it isn't PDAF and doesn't work nearly as well FOR VIDEO. For photography, it's great!

I'll tell you this: if the GH6 doesn't have PDAF, we'll really know about the intentions of Panasonic to let go of MFT or not. It's THE spec that EVERYONE is going to care about, regardless how good they make DFD or repackage it and call it something else. No one is listening anymore IMO. Just pay the piper and pass it on to the customer.

 

DfD in the GH6 won't tell us anything about Panasonic's plans for M43 because DfD is what they're moving forward with in both systems. 

The auto focus in S35 mode on the S5 looks quite promising/usable. I'm wondering if we'll get even better performance on a smaller sensor, since it requires even less processing? Fingers crossed. 

[Video Hummus]

7 hours ago, John Matthews said:

Just pay the piper and pass it on to the customer.

 

My whole argument was that they don’t have the option to pay the piper so they are stuck with improving what they got!

[John Matthews]

3 hours ago, Video Hummus said:

My whole argument was that they don’t have the option to pay the piper so they are stuck with improving what they got!

Please explain to why Fuji, Nikon, Olympus and Canon can have PDAF on their Sony sensors but Panasonic cannot.

[Tim Sewell]

I think Canon and Fuji make their own sensors don’t they? And the DPAF on Canon cameras is all their own work (and still much better than Sony’s).

[John Matthews]

10 minutes ago, Tim Sewell said:

I think Canon and Fuji make their own sensors don’t they? And the DPAF on Canon cameras is all their own work (and still much better than Sony’s).

Both of those companies have used Sony sensors and PDAF. As for Canon vs Sony AF, I think it depends.

[Video Hummus]

7 hours ago, John Matthews said:

Please explain to why Fuji, Nikon, Olympus and Canon can have PDAF on their Sony sensors but Panasonic cannot.

I can’t! The fact that every single camera they release people say its great but I want PDAF and Panasonic just ignores their feedback? They have lost tens of millions of dollars because their cameras AF can’t keep up. I don’t believe they are stupid or stubborn anymore. They are pretty responsive to their customers. So I’m more inclined to believe their is some kind of license restriction or something blocking them for paying the money to have PDAF on their sensors. And its not like it isn’t available on the MFT sensors. Olympus had it and they shared a sensor in the latest generation of cameras.

7 hours ago, Tim Sewell said:

I think Canon and Fuji make their own sensors don’t they? And the DPAF on Canon cameras is all their own work (and still much better than Sony’s).

Canon designs and manufactures their own sensors I believe. Fuji has some design but they use Sony Semi and their technology in their sensors so it’s not a all Fuji. The whole patented X-Trans layout etc...

I honestly think Sony has caught up and is on par with Canon’s DPAF now.  Sony definitely has an advantage in lowlight and high ISO focusing as well. If that matters to you. It doesn’t for me, as I don’t film in at midnight lol.

[Video Hummus]

16 minutes ago, Video Hummus said:

So I’m more inclined to believe their is some kind of license restriction or something blocking them for paying the money to have PDAF on their sensors

Not to mention Leica has said they “don’t have PDAF available to them” which makes me believe Sony has tight restrictions on PDAF patents. And the fact that other, old school camera companies such as Nikon, Fuji, Olympus have it has more to do with weird patent and technology agreements among those companies and perhaps Minolta in the past (or whoever acquired the original patent portfolio for it). Panasonic is a new comer in the camera industry, by a long shot, compared to those companies. And leica is a Germany camera competitor and we all know the Japanese vs German imaging battle that went on for years. Japan won the majority of the market.

So I’m more included to believe that Panasonic is in the same boat as Leica and that they “don’t have PDAF available to them” so they built upon contrast based system. I’m not sure there are other ways to do focus except with lasers, or IR, or ultrasonic projection and apparently Panasonic doesn’t like those methods.

It’s a mystery and would make a great “industry investigative story” documentary.

[John Matthews]

15 minutes ago, Video Hummus said:

Not to mention Leica has said they “don’t have PDAF available to them” which makes me believe Sony has tight restrictions on PDAF patents. And the fact that other, old school camera companies such as Nikon, Fuji, Olympus have it has more to do with weird patent and technology agreements among those companies and perhaps Minolta in the past (or whoever acquired the original patent portfolio for it). Panasonic is a new comer in the camera industry, by a long shot, compared to those companies. And leica is a Germany camera competitor and we all know the Japanese vs German imaging battle that went on for years. Japan won the majority of the market.

So I’m more included to believe that Panasonic is in the same boat as Leica and that they “don’t have PDAF available to them” so they built upon contrast based system. I’m not sure there are other ways to do focus except with lasers, or IR, or ultrasonic projection and apparently Panasonic doesn’t like those methods.

It’s a mystery and would make a great “industry investigative story” documentary.

I'm going to say this is pure speculation and I don't think Panasonic deserves a "pass" on not including PDAF, other than (maybe) they didn't pay Sony for some sort of "right" to put phase detect points on the back of the sensor. And your theory wouldn't hold up if you consider Olympus who had PDAF in all modes. Sure, Olympus is a older player, but still.

If there is truth to any to your theory, Sony sounds like a predatory monopoly. I wouldn't go to Sony Pictures to pitch your documentary idea.

[Video Hummus]

9 minutes ago, John Matthews said:

I'm going to say this is pure speculation and I don't think Panasonic deserves a "pass" on not including PDAF, other than (maybe) they didn't pay Sony for some sort of "right" to put phase detect points on the back of the sensor. And your theory wouldn't hold up if you consider Olympus who had PDAF in all modes. Sure, Olympus is a older player, but still.

If there is truth to any to your theory, Sony sounds like a predatory monopoly. I wouldn't go to Sony Pictures to pitch your documentary idea.

Yes its pure speculation on my part. The fact that we don’t know why is strange in itself, don’t you think? Olympus is an old player, perhaps they had their finger in the pie and hence had some grandfathered in PDAF use license...who knows.

And just to be clear, I’m not giving Panasonic a pass on DfD. I want more reliable autofocus. PDAF would give it to them right now so I am advocating they do that to fix their AF woes and camera sales.

Now, if Olympus or JIP could somehow get 10-bit in their camera with their pleasing color science and partner with Panasonic to get good codec and video processing and a proper LOG format then they would have something compelling. They have the lenses. They have PDAF. They have good SooC color. They have the weather sealing and body design. They don’t have good menus (complete shite imo).

They have lots of ingredients. Someone just needs to back the pie.

[John Matthews]

3 minutes ago, Video Hummus said:

Now, if Olympus or JIP could somehow get 10-bit in their camera with their pleasing color science and partner with Panasonic to get good codec and video processing and a proper LOG format then they would have something compelling. They have the lenses. They have PDAF. They have good SooC color. They have the weather sealing and body design. They don’t have good menus (complete shite imo).

This might be wishful thinking, but you're right. Not much needs to be done for Olympus to kick ass in MFT (sorry, watching too much Cobra Kai!). I will say, about their menus, the super control panel is the best thing since sliced bread. Decent slow-mo and internal, editable, 10-bit should be a top priority. Finally, they simply need to tweak their face detection to work at a greater distance from the subject. With all the rest being the same, it would be a winner!

Again, ain't nobody goin to buy that GH6 with PDAF IMO. There are just too many other options at the same price-point. I'd rather run a two-camera setup with Blackmagic 4k and a Sigma quatro, or something there the likes.