Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How interested are you in a GH6 anymore?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Originally posted by DLD View Post
    Eight years later, it announced a far superior 12K model and people yawned. Not because the camera was a bad value for its price but because 12K was not in demand. And because Canon announced an 8K camera for a much lower price.
    Even if 12K was in demand, the camera was too expensive for most.

    $10K for a BRAW-only camera with a PL mount is a big investment compared to other available systems.

    If it was $6K with an EF mount and ProRes I think it would have had similar success like their G2.

    Comment


      I don't. I think 8K is a plateau that's not going to be exceeded in video - in terms of streaming, media, displays and what not - for a long time On a 16K still image, one can, at least, zoom in. In video, the finer details are no longer discernible and the added bother of super large file sizes isn't worth it.

      PS. I was heavy pro 4K back in 2013-14 because I thought it was a big jump from HD. Many disagreed but 4K became the dominant format just in a few years. Now 8K TV's are out but most of them only upscale the existing resolution. So, even getting to the complete 8K system is going to take a while. And 16K? Fogeaboutit.

      Comment


        Originally posted by DLD View Post
        I don't. I think 8K is a plateau that's not going to be exceeded in video - in terms of streaming, media, displays and what not - for a long time On a 16K still image, one can, at least, zoom in. In video, the finer details are no longer discernible and the added bother of super large file sizes isn't worth it.
        I think this is pretty much true. I think Brawley said he couldn't see the difference between 8K and 12K. But that 12K could be useful for reframing/cropping in and then exporting in 8K. (Of course, that in itself gives SOME reason to shoot more than 8K...)

        But if the Ursa 12K were $6k and EF mount, then it would just be offering more for the same price. So you would expect it to be at least as popular as the G2, no?

        And I totally agree with DLD that excess capabilities are not a strong motivator for purchase. I would not pay 2x as much for a camera with 10x more resolution than I want/need. I would not pay anything more, in fact. Nor would I pay more for 24-bit video or 2,000,000 fps.
        www.VideoAbe.com

        "In this world, Elwood, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant." -Harvey

        Comment


          $6K and EF/RF and ProRes would have easily put it on a consideration list for many. G1/G2 was a pretty hot camera in the BM community. And at one point, the URSA Minis were probably the most popular cinema cameras in the world among the lower-end (2015/2016).

          I wouldn't pay for extra resolution either, but I would have and did pay extra for 4K/60p years ago for the slow-motion which I guess was paying for resolution as well. I was so tired of upscaling 1080p in a 4K timeline (I always delivered in 4K).

          Comment


            Originally posted by ahalpert View Post

            Haha so not true. I talk with so many camerapeople in The Real World who have no idea about new cameras 6 months after they're announced. Or people who bought an R5 and got burned by overheating without ever hearing that it was a thing before experiencing it firsthand. Dvxusers are super clued in

            Anyway I think we're all just excited about the timing, not NAB itself. We want announcements
            While that is true I doubt NAB would change that. Clueless is clueless no matter what.

            Comment


              2,000,000 fps would be useful for watching paint dry. Jackson Pollock would probably buy one of those.

              Comment


                Originally posted by DLD View Post
                I don't. I think 8K is a plateau that's not going to be exceeded in video - in terms of streaming, media, displays and what not - for a long time
                For cameras I think 16K will come sooner than later, look to Red to take the lead.

                Comment


                  Originally posted by ahalpert View Post



                  But if the Ursa 12K were $6k and EF mount, then it would just be offering more for the same price. So you would expect it to be at least as popular as the G2, no?

                  And I totally agree with DLD that excess capabilities are not a strong motivator for purchase. I would not pay 2x as much for a camera with 10x more resolution than I want/need. I would not pay anything more, in fact. Nor would I pay more for 24-bit video or 2,000,000 fps.
                  If you consider that the only other (in this price range) non-time-limited 8K camera option is the 30P Sony Alpha 1 at $6498, the U12K $5995 price looks reasonable in the right circumstances; you already own PL glass and even if you don't, the $175 EF mount makes it both, with internal ND, and show stopper frame rates, 8K-160 FPS, 12K-75 FPS. Who needs that? Well, 8K televisions do 60 FPS, I've got one, and although I've had very little time to play around with U12K, I can imagine that 8K-120FPS slowed down 2:1 at 60 FPS is going to blow some minds. Think about it as the ultimate B-Roll cam. You're not going to shoot that way normally, but for stock footage, even YouTube 8K/60P there are unique opportunities. And people do have 8K televisions now. I've fit the U12K into a few limited wedding roles, one pretty significant actually, a bright and colorful Nigerian wedding shot in 8K, mostly from an unmanned fixed angle but 100% relevant and extraordinarily beautiful.

                  Comment


                    Originally posted by Tom Roper View Post

                    If you consider that the only other (in this price range) non-time-limited 8K camera option is the 30P Sony Alpha 1 at $6498, the U12K $5995 price looks reasonable in the right circumstances; you already own PL glass and even if you don't, the $175 EF mount makes it both, with internal ND, and show stopper frame rates, 8K-160 FPS, 12K-75 FPS. Who needs that? Well, 8K televisions do 60 FPS, I've got one, and although I've had very little time to play around with U12K, I can imagine that 8K-120FPS slowed down 2:1 at 60 FPS is going to blow some minds. Think about it as the ultimate B-Roll cam. You're not going to shoot that way normally, but for stock footage, even YouTube 8K/60P there are unique opportunities. And people do have 8K televisions now. I've fit the U12K into a few limited wedding roles, one pretty significant actually, a bright and colorful Nigerian wedding shot in 8K, mostly from an unmanned fixed angle but 100% relevant and extraordinarily beautiful.
                    Oh for sure. I wasn't trying to comment on the usefulness or value proposition of the Ursa 12K in particular. NorBro suggested that it was less popular than the G2. Which I'm sure had something to do with the higher launch price. But also having a different mount makes it harder to compare and probably more expensive to own for some.

                    Plus, I was intentionally vague about what resolution or framerate a person actually wants. maybe it's 12K, 16K, or 32K. (For me it's still basically just 4K, although it would be nice to have the option to do 8K.) But my point is that once a camera clearly offers MORE than you need, you probably won't be willing to pay MORE to get that feature
                    www.VideoAbe.com

                    "In this world, Elwood, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant." -Harvey

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by ahalpert View Post
                      Plus, I was intentionally vague about what resolution or framerate a person actually wants. maybe it's 12K, 16K, or 32K. (For me it's still basically just 4K, although it would be nice to have the option to do 8K.) But my point is that once a camera clearly offers MORE than you need, you probably won't be willing to pay MORE to get that feature
                      I totally understand and agree. I think it would be natural for a lot of people to look at 12K, 8K, 120P as useless overkill (and media cost for raw!), and PL as expensive. But I had been on the fence going round and round when U12K was still $10K and the alternatives were the R5 with its time limitations or the still very expensive Alpha 1, both of which had some incredible positives and a lot faster handling, but very expensive for me to start building yet another lens ecosystem that was not just a duplication but a triplication of focal lengths I already had in two mounts, PL and EF. It was the big price cut on the U12K that made all the difference or else I'd still be debating myself with the choices.

                      To the point about mounts, I'm not always sure or not whether people understand because I hear it often, "I wish the U12K didn't come in PL mount," when the EF mount can be purchased for only $175. Or maybe it is I who don't understand they don't want EF either. But either way for a cinema cam, it gives you the option between two giant lens universes. For Sony E-mount or Panasonic L Mount or Canon RF mount, a person would need a pretty strong belief for a cinema body that's never going to see AF, and even with such as the Sigma Art line, the compromise in focus breathing is pretty extreme with any DSLR/Mirrorless compared to PL.

                      Comment


                        I think a lot of people (I definitely am) would like to see a different body from BM.

                        UM has been around for going on 7 years now (slightly changed over the years with ND being the most important update)...we need a fresh, slick, preferably FF cinema camera from BM.

                        Comment


                          Originally posted by Tom Roper View Post
                          For cameras I think 16K will come sooner than later, look to Red to take the lead.
                          If they can do 8K 120, then they should be able to do 16K 30. Or, at least, 24.

                          All they need is a 140 megapixel sensor.

                          Comment


                            I would not be surprised if we did not see the A7IV or the GH6 this year due to the chip shortage. It seems to be a huge mess without a clear end in sight. But, I could be wrong. Maybe we will just get announcements with 2022 availability.

                            Comment


                              Originally posted by Bassman2003 View Post
                              I would not be surprised if we did not see the A7IV or the GH6 this year due to the chip shortage. It seems to be a huge mess without a clear end in sight. But, I could be wrong. Maybe we will just get announcements with 2022 availability.
                              Wouldn't a better solution be to phase out or ramp down older products to make up for the chip shortages and get a new product out there?

                              Comment


                                Originally posted by Thomas Smet View Post
                                Wouldn't a better solution be to phase out or ramp down older products to make up for the chip shortages and get a new product out there?
                                That's what I've been saying ... unless the chips are different generation and the wiring/motherboards aren't compatible with older models.

                                A note from Panasonic, published on Weibo of all places. They're saying that they're not selling Lumix (of course, it's basically worthless to a third party) and are planning "exciting models" both in FF and in MFT. In the FF area, I'd like to ask their execs if those are mostly rebadged and repackaged Sony models, with shared R&D along the way.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X