GH2 GH3: Panny: YES uncompressed HDMI, firmware focus peaking....

Bern Caughey said:
Hope I'm wrong, but my suspension is the WiFi will be much less useful than many desire.
Click to expand...

My thoughts all along, Im guessing there will be a delay, even if milliseconds. I could be wrong, but it seems like it's more of a gimic than a useful tool. Will have to see.

I remember when everyone was happy about adobe on location, then the eternal delay made it useless for monitoring even when connected to firewire. Either way, i'm looking foreward to actually seeing what it's all about.
 
Wifi...kinda useless when you're in the field and there's no wifi. Phone tethering possibilities?
 
I could see it being useful if say your doing a 48hr film fest, It could be useful for the editor to get the takes real time so he could cut on the fly. Or an off location producer wanted to see some takes. But I usually dont have the time to deal with things like that as shooting narrative films is complicated enough.
 
Gary Huff said:
You are correct, Jim. The GH2 puts out a "clean" (no overlays) and "uncompressed" HDMI signal.
Click to expand...

Yes, but keylight posted the uncomrpessed part in yellow, as if it were a new feature to have uncompressed output via HDMI, when to the best of my knowledge, that's all ANY video connection puts out.
 
maranfilms said:
My thoughts all along, Im guessing there will be a delay, even if milliseconds. I could be wrong, but it seems like it's more of a gimic than a useful tool. Will have to see.

I remember when everyone was happy about adobe on location, then the eternal delay made it useless for monitoring even when connected to firewire. Either way, i'm looking foreward to actually seeing what it's all about.
Click to expand...

I'm guessing that the WiFi is more tailored to the photography side of the equation.
 
I think remote monitoring on an ipad via wifi is pretty rad if it works seamlessly enough. I can set my phone up as a wifi hotspot, then connect the ipad and the camera to my phone. So long as 3G is fast enough for a real time (or close enough) this could be super useful.
 
RE WiFi, Pro Audio Connectivity, Video vs Hybrid/Still end use and more. I just applied for the opening at Panasonic Lumix. The company needs my skillset mix. They have the 'bits & Pieces' but clearly need the guidance in integration and the business development pointed at the new demographic of ..... drum roll please. Small Form Factor Pro User. Wish me luck!
 
maranfilms said:
So it's just for the stills, no vid through wifi?
Click to expand...
This page strongly implies that there will be live video monitoring, but it doesn't come out and say that outright: http://panasonic.net/avc/lumix/systemcamera/gms/gh3/body_expandability.html

However, there is sure to be a delay. It's wireless after all. But even if there's a delay, it could have its uses like, for example, a replacement for a video village or other monitors where crew members and others, not the operator, need to review the shots. It just wouldn't be a replacement for a camera mounted monitor for the camera operator. I don't really expect it to be because there are going to be inherent shortcomings (latency, resolution, and color, probably) with using a wireless technology. Look at the Teradek Cube (http://www.teradek.com/pages/cube) for an example of what may be possible with this - see what they market it for. I think that's about the best we can hope for from wifi monitoring, and that's a $1k+ dedicated/specialized product. By the way, the Teradek page mentions a 1/4 second delay.

Oh, and I doubt they will require a hotspot for the wifi to work, as that would defeat the purpose. Wifi spec allows for "ad hoc" networking, that is, networking device to device directly without the need for a hotspot. You can do this between two laptops, for example.
 
Last edited:
atarijedi said:
No, just that they put more effort into developing the photo side, and video was more of a "oh, we should give the video folks some stuff too".
Click to expand...
yeas. int kinda sucks that it was the VIDEO capability that put the GH2 on the map (crappy stills) , and yet it's the stills market that Panasonic focused on with the GH3. You know, 20 years in the tech industry and I see that Marketing + Developers are STILL out of sync with the end-users :(
Some company is going to 'get it right' in 2013 and they will steal the show at CES or Photokina 2013.
 
Zephyrnoid said:
Some company is going to 'get it right' in 2013 and they will steal the show at CES or Photokina 2013.
Click to expand...

They'll have to be magicians then, since there is no show next year. Photokina happens once every two years.....:)

(Something you should bear in mind if you go on that interview.) :beer:
 
Zephyrnoid said:
Developers are STILL out of sync with the end-users
Click to expand...

They sell many more higher end video cameras up the ladder for big bucks. Of course they could put $5,000 value in a $1,299 camera, but that would be out of sync with stock holders. What ever it comes with I sure it will be well worth it for me.
 
Last edited:
ROCKMORE said:
They sell many more higher end video cameras up the ladder for big bucks. Of course they could put $5,000 value in a $1,299 camera, but that would be out of sync with stock holders. What ever it comes with I sure it will be well worth it for me.
Click to expand...

That's a semi reasonable answer. The crux is this:
When Moore's Law intersects the Supply & Demand economics in the past, consumers were in fact able to derive exponentially greater value from the same money as each new iteration of a product was made available.
In the second decade of the 21st Century that formula is no longer true. In fact, the value-added calculus is no longer exponential. In some cases (GH2) the value added greatly exceeded the incremental cost. In much of the rest of Middle-ware the formula is less advantageous and ebay's law kicks in instead.
Ebay's law states in summary that a consumer community will pay anything to satisfy an incremental need for improvement, versus waiting patiently for the calculus to benefit the consumer versus the developer or manufacturer.
That's in part why late adopters make off like bandits. They blow smoke in the manufacturer's face for 'doubling the price' yet only delivering 125% added value. RED Digital, I'm lookkng at you.
In a competitive digital video paradigm, whomsoever listens best to the consumer and sets price appropriately, wins.
$1,299 is a lot of money at retail for a device that costs $100 per unit to build and ship at wholesale.
The manufacturers' greed factor is astounding!
 
Zephyrnoid said:
$1,299 is a lot of money at retail for a device that costs $100 per unit to build and ship at wholesale. The manufacturers' greed factor is astounding!
Click to expand...

You are apparently ignorant of the costs that are derived from simply designing, building the camera in the first place. It's not just the cost of the parts that are assembled together.
 
Zephyrnoid said:
$1,299 is a lot of money at retail for a device that costs $100 per unit to build and ship at wholesale.
Click to expand...

...+$[unknown] on research and development supplies, building maintenance, insurance, tax, regulation compliance, employee benefits and wages, etc, etc, etc.......

IMO they're no more "greedy" than, say, a videographer who charges $500 to spend a day making a video with only ~$50 direct/immediate/visible cost
 
How in the world can anybody think $1,299.00 is too much for a camera of this caliber? I have worked with $10,000.00 + cameras that couldn't even come close to this level of quality. Heck my GH2 beats the crap out of our SONY Cinealta F900 at work which cost over $100,000.00. Instead of the manufacturers having a greed factor how about it is some of the consumers here who are the greedy ones. They want, want, want and want it for less, less, less with no care as to how a company is going to deliver such a product and still make a profit. If you haven't looked Panasonic isn't exactly sucking in huge profits these days. Consumer products are priced so they can turn a profit on bulk sales and not turning a profit on a few sales. If GH cameras are not under every Christmas tree then a company like Panasonic really doesn't earn as much as they hoped.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top