Fujifilm X-T4 camera rumored specifications : 6k60p video and 10-bit internal

[puredrifting]

Changing an entire camera system (especially the lensing) because of the TC is not realistic.
I am not trying to find a solution to what currently doesn't properly exist.
(I own four Tentacles and it's often a PIA.)
I am talking about the need of manufacturers to make it exist.

We are reading 6K pixels worth of image at 25, 30 or 60 fps nowadays.
Honestly, how difficult is it to have a decent clock and jamsync ?
You want to sell multiple cameras ? Strikes me as obvious.

I think this is interrelated to audio in mirrorless cameras, it's the same mentality with the manufacturers about TC implementation.
They should build in decent TC capability to all prosumer cameras but they simply don't care because the market isn't demanding it.
The majority of consumers of mirrorless aren't working pros, they are hobbyists. I just finished my review of the BMD PCC6K a few months back
and it was so incredibly refreshing to have a mirrorless sized prosumer camera with a Mini XLR audio input with phantom power.

Why don't all mirrorless manufacturers implement real, realiable, easy to use TC implementation on every mirrorless camera?
Why don't all mirrorless manufacturers implement two Mini XLRs with phantom power on every mirrorless camera?
Why don't all mirrorless manufacturers get rid of garbage micro, mini and Type A HDMI outputs and replace or supplement them with Mini SDI?
Why don't all mirrorless manufacturers stop using plastic 3.5mm inputs and outputs and replace them only with metal 3.5mm inputs and outputs?

The only conclusion we can draw is because we (working pros) are not the audience for their product. The hobbyist, and high end consumer are their audience.
And that audience doesn't even know or care what most of these things are, why they are important in a professional workflow. A lot of people will say, "If pro features
are important to you, buy a pro camera with those features." I guess it is true, when I use my X-T3 on a pro shoot and the footage ends on on TV or on a theater
screen, it does feel a bit like a "hack" to me, like, "Wow, I got away with using a $1,500.00 camera on a real project." ;-)

 

[puredrifting]

I can't say I disagree with you Dan but it sounds like you are referencing using the internal mic of the camera. Nobody would argue that there is better but in my experience, the GH5 with the XLR unit is pretty good, especially with post treatment. I guess my point is, good enough for work that includes using a $2,000 camera. Which is a lot these days!
I would like to convey to all of the manufacturers that this level of audio for all of the top tier mirrorless cameras is needed for them to be complete video tools. Because the people that buy and use them probably do mid to low level paying work! So if the bots are reading this - Fuji, make an XLR audio adapter.

I've fed the 3.5mm out from our Mic Pre 3 to the Fuji, for some interviews, that's what I was referencing. I don't have a problem with them offering an audio interface. There is a market for it.
But after meeting with and working with some people at Fuji, I don't think you'll see one from them. At least not in the near future. They are still building micro HDMI outputs on a $10k camera.
They still don't offer a video waveform monitor in addition to a useless for video shooting histogram. You still can't shoot FLog and view a REC709 image on the screen on the X-T3. I'll be surprised
if the X-T4 addresses any of these issues because Fuji is still 99.9% a stills company that has had to implement some good quality video into their still cameras. They are slowly, very slowly becoming
more focused on video in their cameras. But they still don't seem to have a working video pro that they are collaborating with, who is being a reality barometer about what is needed to turn their
cameras into a more complete video package. And I still don't see a dedicated Fuji pro video camera on any horizon anytime soon.

 

[Erik Naso]

We are reading 6K pixels worth of image at 25, 30 or 60 fps nowadays.
Honestly, how difficult is it to have a decent clock and jamsync ?
You want to sell multiple cameras ? Strikes me as obvious.

Yes, it is frustrating to not have all the professional features a broadcast or cinema camera has in a body designed primarily for stills. :happy:

 

[ade4all]

I've used a mix pre-d into a Panasonic GH5 and it is night and day better than mix pre-d into the XT3. Not all mirrorless have unusable internal audio, hopefully the XT4 is Panasonic quality or above

 

[Bassman2003]

I've fed the 3.5mm out from our Mic Pre 3 to the Fuji, for some interviews, that's what I was referencing. I don't have a problem with them offering an audio interface. There is a market for it.
But after meeting with and working with some people at Fuji, I don't think you'll see one from them. At least not in the near future. They are still building micro HDMI outputs on a $10k camera.
They still don't offer a video waveform monitor in addition to a useless for video shooting histogram. You still can't shoot FLog and view a REC709 image on the screen on the X-T3. I'll be surprised
if the X-T4 addresses any of these issues because Fuji is still 99.9% a stills company that has had to implement some good quality video into their still cameras. They are slowly, very slowly becoming
more focused on video in their cameras. But they still don't seem to have a working video pro that they are collaborating with, who is being a reality barometer about what is needed to turn their
cameras into a more complete video package. And I still don't see a dedicated Fuji pro video camera on any horizon anytime soon.

It is a shame as they (all of the makers) are wandering into a gray area. Non-pro people do not know what 4:2:2 and all of the video stuff that is being added is, so if they are beefing up these hybrid cameras, it seems in vein for the target audience. Panasonic asked for true market feedback after the GH3 and they seem to get it. Why the others can't just see this happening in the marketplace and mimic I just do not understand.? Probably the cabal that DLD always talks about or something of the like. I will have the same reaction when Canon drops the new 5DR without any XLR audio as well... At least they could add a line in to let the external audio device shine.

 

[DLD]

It is a shame as they (all of the makers) are wandering into a gray area. Non-pro people do not know what 4:2:2 and all of the video stuff that is being added is, so if they are beefing up these hybrid cameras, it seems in vein for the target audience. Panasonic asked for true market feedback after the GH3 and they seem to get it. Why the others can't just see this happening in the marketplace and mimic I just do not understand.? Probably the cabal that DLD always talks about or something of the like...

That's right. They use features - or lack thereof - as product differentiation.

Additionally, Fuji (and Nikon) could have made a video-centric hybrid or an outright entry level pro camera and/or camcorder. Most of the components are there. Car companies made SUV's and crossovers beside the two door sports cars, pickups and sedans. Because they're based on the same chassis. But the Japanese yield these niches to each other and, at the end, they will yield everything to smartphones.

 

[puredrifting]

That's right. They use features - or lack thereof - as product differentiation.

Additionally, Fuji (and Nikon) could have made a video-centric hybrid or an outright entry level pro camera and/or camcorder. Most of the components are there. Car companies made SUV's and crossovers beside the two door sports cars, pickups and sedans. Because they're based on the same chassis. But the Japanese yield these niches to each other and, at the end, they will yield everything to smartphones.

Just curious DLD, what do you think most of us will be shooting non-high budget stuff on in say, three years? Of course, if we have a real budget, we'll still be renting or buying the latest Arri/RED and possibly Venice but for those of us who predominantly are using digital cinema cameras
(not mirrorless/DSLRs), to do paying work for clients, using cameras that cost $7,500.00 to $20k today, do you see that gear segment disappearing, fading away and people will just use advanced phones/phone based devices or do you see our market niche still staying around and the big
three or four still making cameras like the FX9, C500 MKII, etc?

What about a real camera that is essentially a dock for one of these smartphones? Shoulder mount with weight, some new, un-invented way to interface these amazing new smartphone sensors into a professional package that can accept real optics, shoulder mount, has some weight and
heft, accepts XLRs/Pro Audio and supplies phantom? Could that be a way forward? I don't see professional users actually wanting to shoot with a smartphone form factor but it sounds as if we will want the benefits of computational photography, wireless tech for audio, lightfield acquisition,
etc. but with the ability to handhold/shoulder mount shoot, interface with profesisional sound, etc.? It seems as if there could be a marriage of the amazing smartphone computing power with the physical attributes that production professionals need? Just spitballing here.

 

[Gweilo66]

"What about a real camera that is essentially a dock for one of these smartphones? Shoulder mount with weight, some new, un-invented way to interface these amazing new smartphone sensors into a professional package that can accept real optics, shoulder mount, has some weight and
heft, accepts XLRs/Pro Audio and supplies phantom?"
I remember years ago there was a small company offering similar for DSLR form factor.
I can't remember the name.

Also..as mentioned prior. Has anyone fed continuous TC to GH5's tc input via "lockit" box?
There is a big difference between jam/remove and active, onboard TC sync slaving.

Edit:
https://nofilmschool.com/2015/06/pandora-dslr-optimizer-camera-rig-unlike-any-youve-ever-seen
https://www.cinema5d.com/came-tv-terapin-rig-review-turn-your-mirrorless-into-a-pro-camera/

 

[yoclay]

Yes, it is frustrating to not have all the professional features a broadcast or cinema camera has in a body designed primarily for stills. :happy:

So tell me what stills users need 6K video ?
Or for that matter how many video people really need 6K ?
I can show you a ton of professional cameras that lack even 4K.
But they can't implement jamsync on a decent clock ?
Why even have TC for stills users ?
Fail to see the logic.

 

[DLD]

Just curious DLD, what do you think most of us will be shooting non-high budget stuff on in say, three years? ...

The prediction game depends on whether the photo-video industry begins to lose participants - Ricoh/Pentax and Olympus to start with - and whether it will force the rest to be more market responsive and engage in actual competition. Or whether there'll be some sort of a merger between companies, including some being bought out by the major players in the smartphone business. I think both will happen but it's impossible to predict who will be bought out. We know it won't be Sony but it can be the imaging division from anyone else.

But if not, let's look at the new Canon cameras as a meaningful harbinger of things to come. If R5 has the desired video performance, it'll become the go-to model for the low to medium budget productions, especially when paired up with the high quality RF glass. It'll be sort of like the new C200 but for one third the price. Likewise, A7SIII/IV, if it ever comes out, would be of the similar importance. FX-6 could also play a major role.

And Steven Soderbergh Junior will make a Netflix blockbuster on the above, thereby giving it his imprimatur. And then they'll begin to replace a lot of Reds on sets.

But they'll never replace ARRI in big budgets.

PS. Someone brought up used Amiras on the C500 MKII thread. So, I checked out eBay and found one. I found dozens of Reds - Epic, Dragon, Raven, Mysterium, Helium.

PPS. A while ago I made a wild proposal that whoever comes out with an ILC smartphone will win the high end smartphone race. Instead, the periscope zooms moved in. The market is too big to make one videocentric model at this point. It'll have to be someone like BMD or Red buying a complete unit from a Chinese manufacturer and then adding the interchangeable lens mount. But it'll need a lot of effort to make an AF glass for it.

 

[TheDingo]

If R5 has the desired video performance, it'll become the go-to model for the low to medium budget productions, especially when paired up with the high quality RF glass. It'll be sort of like the new C200 but for one third the price. Likewise, A7SIII/IV, if it ever comes out, would be of the similar importance. FX-6 could also play a major role.

The proof is in the pudding, and I'm going to have to see proof that the R5 camera can actually deliver something that Canon hasn't been able to deliver so far. ( I'm also a skeptic that Sony will deliver a A7SIII that shoots internal 10-bit because they've been so resistant to doing this so far. )

 

[DLD]

Then there are 1D XMKIII and the soon-to-be-announced (as in, hours away) D6. Neither has the video form but both (should) have excellent video specs. And 1D XMKIII should have a top notch AF on top of that.

 

[davedv]

Also..as mentioned prior. Has anyone fed continuous TC to GH5's tc input via "lockit" box?
There is a big difference between jam/remove and active, onboard TC sync slaving.

Unfortunately the GH5s does not continuously read from the timecode input, even if you leave a timecode generator attached. So it really only supports jam sync style of operation, synchronizing its internal clock when a timecode signal is initially connected to the input, but then the internal clock can drift from that point forward (at least until the timecode signal is disconnected and reconnected to perform another jam sync).

More on this limitation in this video:

Unlike the GH5s, the Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K and 6K do properly support continuous timecode sources, so on those cameras you can leave a timecode generator connected and not have to worry about things getting out of sync.

 

[yoclay]

Unfortunately the GH5s does not continuously read from the timecode input, even if you leave a timecode generator attached. So it really only supports jam sync style of operation, synchronizing its internal clock when a timecode signal is initially connected to the input, but then the internal clock can drift from that point forward (at least until the timecode signal is disconnected and reconnected to perform another jam sync).

That's just bloody negligent...bordering on shameful.

 

[Gweilo66]

Thanks,
Nice to have the scenario better addressed.
According to that video, about 3/4 frame slip after 40 minutes.
That's pretty good, considering. You'd think a firmware revision could at least enable a re-jam at each clip record start.

 

[brettsherman]

Yes, it is frustrating to not have all the professional features a broadcast or cinema camera has in a body designed primarily for stills. :happy:

I think that is sort of the root of the problem. The reason I, Dan, and I suspect you keep buying SLR/mirrorless is because that is a useful form factor. It goes on a gimbal, because of reduced weight you can actually handhold it without rigging, it is less intimidating looking, and I can travel with two bodies. It's not primarily because of lower cost, we'd certainly be happy to pay an extra $1000 or more for pro features. And we'd even handle a slightly larger body at less than 3 lbs. But it's as if the manufacturers don't realize this. They're not building the small camera that we want, even though they certainly could. So what else can we do except go on the boards and ***** about it. :happy:

 

[Erik Naso]

I think that is sort of the root of the problem. The reason I, Dan, and I suspect you keep buying SLR/mirrorless is because that is a useful form factor. It goes on a gimbal, because of reduced weight you can actually handhold it without rigging, it is less intimidating looking, and I can travel with two bodies. It's not primarily because of lower cost, we'd certainly be happy to pay an extra $1000 or more for pro features. And we'd even handle a slightly larger body at less than 3 lbs. But it's as if the manufacturers don't realize this. They're not building the small camera that we want, even though they certainly could. So what else can we do except go on the boards and ***** about it. :happy:

Haha. So true. The S1H is a pretty loaded camera. I just don't think manufacturers, in general, want to over-invest in very expensive hybrids. That market is probably smaller than we think. I'm all for it but I just don't think we sill see many options. At least now we have a few so that's a good thing. I use mirrorless cameras all the time. Very handy for all the reasons stated. I have high hopes that the X-T4 will be a killer camera. The slightly larger body and a bigger battery alone is huge. Add all the Fujifilm goodness and it's sure to be a winner. It won't have TC jamming I bet.

 

[Gweilo66]

Differing from other features withheld to protect higher tiered cams, TC support more likely when a plausible B-cam within a company's established ecosystem. (C200 notwithstanding)

 

[Finster]

Has this already been noted? Fugi Rumors is now saying the XT4 will not shoot 6K.

 

[Lkorver]

Whats the max FPS in 4k?