Simon Shasha
Well-known member
10bit. More dynamic-range. Will be killer.
GH13 GH5 Rumors
- Thread starter Zephyrnoid
- Start date
keylight
Veteran
The DR is is most likely a sensor and bandwidth issue. While the sensor is capable of shooting with a higher DR for stills, for video there's a limit to how much data it can process at 30fps. There would also likely be issues with dissipating heat, battery life, and a bunch of other negatives that would need to be overcome.
Even if the camera did have the potential for these things, they would take a lot of time and work to implement. So Panasonic is damned if they do (camera delayed by another year or two, loss of market share as people give up on waiting) and they are damned if they don't (GH3 was a beta. FU Panasonic for not giving us everything we want, when we want it, for the price we want it.)
Or put more simply....
I don't know how much more R&D would be involved. I don't want or need RAW but look at how fast the development of Magic Lantern have moved. They don't even have access to what Canon have access to as its not their product but Magic Lantern have been able to add an unbelievable amount of features to Canon DSLRs. These people are not officially paid and its not their day job. I doubt it would take Panasonic an extra few weeks of work to give us Peaking and a higher bit rate codec in All-I. Unlike Magic Lantern, they don't have to overcome hacking the camera as they have created the camera. They know exactly what needs to be done. Who would have thought a Canon 50D, that didn't shoot video at all, could shoot RAW video?
Don't be fooled, the cameras have the tech and the capability. What native bit depth does the chip output when shooting video? I bet its higher than 8bit. It's not hard too send this out of the HDMI output or downsample it to a 10bit codec instead if an 8bit one.
How is the tiny BM pocket cam getting 13 stops DR considering it uses a tiny body (harder to dissipate heat) and regular sized battery?
It sounds like I want tha world for my money but in truth I just want what we know the hardware is capable of.
as the saying goes..... don't ask, don't get.
Don't be fooled, the cameras have the tech and the capability. What native bit depth does the chip output when shooting video? I bet its higher than 8bit. It's not hard too send this out of the HDMI output or downsample it to a 10bit codec instead if an 8bit one.
How is the tiny BM pocket cam getting 13 stops DR considering it uses a tiny body (harder to dissipate heat) and regular sized battery?
It sounds like I want tha world for my money but in truth I just want what we know the hardware is capable of.
as the saying goes..... don't ask, don't get.
It's sensor only has about 2M pixels. Each pixel is a lot larger and can bring in more light than a 16MP sensor.
keylight
Veteran
First, there are a lot of people (and a lot of resources, A.K.A. man hours) behind Magic Lantern. And they spent a lot of time learning from the incredible work done by the people behind CHDK. And they are working on a camera that was released 4 years ago. So I'm not sure that it really qualifies as "fast development". Oh, and it was THE big breakthrough dSLR for video. The poster child that tons of people bought for video. The GH cameras aren't in the same league in terms of user base, although the GH3 has been purchased by more than a few Canon diehards, so that's good.
In encourage you to visit the Magic Lanter site to find out just how much work went into it.
As to the technical....
This is straight from Panasonic - specifically Michiharu Uematsu, Special Adviser, Imaging Business Group and Yoshiyuki Inoue, Senior Engineering Planner, Marketing Team, Imaging Business Group:
Don't think so. Maybe someday. I'd wager the next GH camera will have it, probably baked in to whatever image processor they use.
EDIT: The new GX7 uses a new sensor with the Venus Engine (doesn't say if this is a new Venus Engine as well, but my guess is that it probably is) that offers focus peaking.
EDIT 2: So it looks like it IS a new Venus Engine in the GX7:
So there you go. The GH3 was released last December (about 8-9 months ago) and in that short time Panasonic has continued development on their technology and come up with a new imaging device AND a new image processing chip. Of course, they've built on top of their previous tech, and probably started work on the new device and chip many months before the GH3 ever came out.
This stuff isn't easy, and it does take a lot of time to do.
Last edited:
As a long term Canon user, I know all about Magic Lantern. Yes, it has evolved greatly over many years but the biggest hurdles they have faced are hurdles that the manufacturers would not have to deal with as it's their camera that they are designing from the ground up. Hacking a camera from scratch is much harder than adding a few features to a camera you already make.
Magic Lantern where able to add a focus peaking function to the lowest of Canon DSLR (550D) that is four years old. You telling me that even though the camera wasn't released with peaking, that it just happened to have the capability all along and the latest and greatest Panasonic flagship camera doesn't? Just doesn't make sense to me.
You can choose to believe what these corporations tell you but I don't buy it.
Again, don't get me wrong, I think the GH3 is a great camera but with a few little fixes it could have been a fantastic camera. I do however think that Panasonic are having a laugh when the released the GH3 with the terrible viewfinder & disappearing info. These are not feature requests but issues they must address for current camera owners.
Magic Lantern where able to add a focus peaking function to the lowest of Canon DSLR (550D) that is four years old. You telling me that even though the camera wasn't released with peaking, that it just happened to have the capability all along and the latest and greatest Panasonic flagship camera doesn't? Just doesn't make sense to me.
You can choose to believe what these corporations tell you but I don't buy it.
Again, don't get me wrong, I think the GH3 is a great camera but with a few little fixes it could have been a fantastic camera. I do however think that Panasonic are having a laugh when the released the GH3 with the terrible viewfinder & disappearing info. These are not feature requests but issues they must address for current camera owners.
Zephyrnoid
Veteran
Yes. In fact if you scour the Internet for me and happen to know my aliases, you'll discover that this theme has been running strong in my posts and published articles.
The vast majority of Consumer and lower level 'Pro-sumer' electronics including cameras, mobile handheld devices and anything that refreshes in less than 4 years are basically consumer subsidized 'public beta'. I'd go as far as to state that ANY device that cannot be upgraded falls under this rubric.
This comes from my experience developing software. We joked that our companies were earning money twice. Once when a consumer buys our products and the second time when we right-off the development costs on our taxes as 'R&D' or 'loss leaders'.
In Japan the principle of industrial manufacture known as 'Kaizen' or continuous improvement drives the constant upgrades but when it applies to a 'finished' product it means that BEFORE a product is released it is improved INTERNALLY.
America taught Japan to be greedy and release products as soon as they contained INCREMENTAL improvements. That's because Americans are addicted to 'Newness'.
Hearkening back to the pre-digital age would mean products would not be refreshed for 5 years or more.
That would drive the American consumer crazy!
Hence the typical 6-10 month refresh cycle.
The GH2 was one of the longest running modern digital models that I can remember. BUT rather than get all the features we were expecting in our run-up discussions of the GH3, we simply got the 'improvements' that were available in time for a Photokina roll out.
SO many astute users have held out. If I get my way, we will all treat these companies the same way. "Deliver our wish list or we will wait".
Now some are making extra money by having the incremental upgrade of the GH3 but the vast majority that bought it are either first time M43 entrants or bored rich patrons of the digicam universe.
What annoys the heck out of me is that the more that consumers continue to subsidize the betas, the more willing that manufacturers are to continue spitting them out.
So what do I use for my corporate/doc work? A crappy Canon HV20 that is basically a first shot across the bow of 1080p .Full of consumer headaches, a pain to use and annoying dropped frames, but it was paid off years ago and never upgraded since Jan 2007 as I wait wait wait wait for an authentic breakthrough to make it worth emptying out my bank account.
To all those that have spent thousands if not tens of thousands on incremental upgrades in the past 6 years ....I thank you for subsidizing my next digital video camera !
And so.... as we ponder the GH4 or GH5 or whatever....... I leave you with this nifty test I just found on Youtube
Zephyrnoid
Veteran
So who can do a GH3 vs Flip Mino HD side by side?
something like this....
http://youtu.be/J0rGxfDPC7E
something like this....
http://youtu.be/J0rGxfDPC7E
stoneinapond
Veteran
I guess you have to have magic to get that..... :2vrolijk_08:
keylight
Veteran
Heck, since it's so simple for Panasonic to do it. And since Canon didn't do but it was so easy-peasy-lemon-squeezy for hackers to do for the 5DMKII without manufacturer support, what's stopping you from doing it for the GH3?
It's easy, right?
As to the disappearing viewfinder, yeah, that does seem like something they should be capable of doing easily, but perhaps they've been inundated with requests ("more than 90%") for focus peaking they could so obviously and easily add, that they've not gotten the message about the info display.
-------
Totally separate from this, I sometimes get the sense that most of the people who claim that "of course it can be done, they just don't want to for marketing reasons or to have a laugh" haven't been around very long. In other words, when I was getting started cameras still had pickup tubes. That wasn't actually that long ago. But if you have to Google pickup tube, then it sort of demonstrates a lack of understanding about how far we've come in such a short time. And hopefully how far we'll go in an equally short time.
keylight
Veteran
Maybe in YOUR posts and articles, but you are not the Internet!
The problem with this perspective is that nothing would ever be developed. At some point, companies have to release products to recoup their R&D investment. That means releasing products that have the latest and greatest technologies, even if they have later and greater technologies they are working on for the future but aren't ready yet. By your reasoning, they should wait to release until they have every last thing (even the things that nobody knows about, or knows they want or need).
For example, it was pretty damn foolish of Apple to release the original hard drive based iPod. They should have waited for the solid state memory iPod to be ready. No wait. They should have waited until the iPhone was ready. Oh damn. They should have waited for the iPad. Hold on, check that. They shouldn't actually have released anything yet. They should wait until they've got the iEye ready. You know, the device that sees the world around you and transmits it all right to your brain.
I know that's a preposterous and extreme example, but seriously where do you draw the line?
And why are you limiting it to Consumer and Pro-sumer? I'm a Nikon guy (not Canon). The D3 was unfinished by your reasoning. And the D3x. And the D4.
Other parts of your post, like Americans being addicted to Newness, I agree with. And you make some good points about the refresh cycle and greed. I use a single word that exemplifies a lot of what you wrote. Can you guess what that word is?
Adobe
And maybe there's a little bit of truth to Panasonic releasing the GH3 in response to the demands of the market. Could they have waited another year to put it out to get the "missing" features added in? Sure. And with that same reasoning, they can wait until 2016 to release the next GH camera so they can get everything in. RAW, 4K at up to 240fps..... Of course by that time all the buzz will be about 8K and HDRAW at 480fps........
zephrynoid...if you don't think dslr video was a revolutionary leap above a 1/3" sensor hv20, then you'll be waiting forever for that leap . I sympathize somewhat , but really.... your attitude is like taking the bus to work , waiting for the jetsons flying car , instead of buying you a nice little vw !
Zephyrnoid
Veteran
Disagree. Look. When the GH3 first got into people hands in what Dec 2012, the first thing that happened was direct comparison to GH2 taking price into consideration. The conclusion? Only worth buying if it's your first M43 and you really need the variable bitrates. So a lot of GH2'srs are holding and good for them. But really, the amount of hassle I've witnessed from DSLR users knocking themselves out to get a 'filmic' look or beat this or that anomaly is ridiculous. I said the Canon HV20 is limited but do you dare me to shoot side by sides with a DSLR or M43 that is $3,000 with lens? The same with the flip. A POS 720p 30fps that I have shot far more footage with than the HV20. no one can tell the difference once it's 720p on Vimeo or Youtube.
I did another calculation a while ago. there have been 175 Nikon cameras released between 2004 and 2013. In the 1970's - 1980's Nikon gave us a new camera every 5 years and that was proper SLR, no point and shoots existed in the Nikon line.
There IS a point when R&D is recovered- that's when the product is perfect. My last SLR's were Nikon FM2's ( three of them- identical) Perfect.
The beta's only began with the digital paradigm.
If a person wants to pay for and own in-betweens, that's thier perrogative.
I NEVER pay for R&D as it's a sucker's game IMHO
Nikon , Canon, Panasonic, Olympus, JVC... shareholders should pay for that.
Do the camera manufacturers pay the throngs of faithful upgraders dividends? Not really. They are laughing all the way to the bank.
So while I do appreciate the Kaizen, I do not appreciate that I am paying for the in-between betas
Last edited:
Yeah, I started my shooting on tube cameras too. It's incredible how far we have come in a relatively short timeframe but the whole world has moved at that pace. Should I be grateful and not complain that the camera I bought has a very poor viewfinder, lacks basic features, and has certain 'features' such as disappearing info that make using it for its intended use very difficult? Should I just say 'oh well, look at how far we've come'?
Panasonic have released a product and marketed it as a hybrid stills/video camera. Video wise, its not up to an acceptable operational standard. I can't believe that when Philip Bloom (or anyone else they gave it to) shot with a pre production version, he would not have flagged the disappearing info with Panasonic if the pre prod camera suffered this same flaw. Maybe they added the feature afterwards and released it to the public without any feedback? Speculation but considering the outcry from users, its hard to believe that the GH3 had much time being tested in its final state as these issues would have arisen within a few minutes use.
I too believe the consumer is now treated as a beta tester and the GH3 not only feels like an incomplete product rushed to market, but Panasonic have themselves admitted it. Why should I be content with that?
malibudutchie
Well-known member
That is total BS. How can you even begin to suggest that when compared with a 5D Mark III it is a third of the price and does pretty well as much. OK, it has shortcomings, so go buy a C500 for $25K. You been harping on about how this is a conspiracy by Panasonic to beta test an incomplete product, where really it gives everyone access to broadcast quality standard at a fraction of the cost of a broadcast camera. You don't like it, why did you buy it? You're not content, sell it and buy something else. Me, I have 2 GH3's and a GH2, lots of good glass, accessories and shoot broadcast standard footage for TV - all for less than 10K. You don't even buy a lens for that in the broadcast world.
BS is it?
Would Sony release a video camera where sometimes you press the record button once to record and sometimes you have to press it twice to record? This alone makes the GH3 not fit for purpose. Would the stills guys be happy if they sometimes had to press the shutter button once to take a shot but sometimes had to press it twice. Irrelevant of price, this is a major flaw. A $300 video camera doesn't have this flaw so why does the flagship Panasonic Hybrid Camera? Would professionals be happy if their on screen info disappeared during a take leaving them blind in relation to what their camera was doing? These are two issues that should not be allowed onto a $300 camera let alone a camera like the GH3. When I bought the camera, I did not know of these issues as they are not listed on Panasonics GH3 page. Selling the camera now means I would loose money on it. Why should I have to do that when Panasonic can so easily fix these issues?
The images are great from the GH3 considering the price but I shouldn't have to spend $25K on a C500 like you suggest to get a camera that goes into record the first time I press the record button.
I've never experienced this when shooting still photos with my GH3, but occasionally I've had it happen when shooting video. It's really not a big deal for me, as all it means is waiting an extra half second with my finger on the REC button if it doesn't start recording on the first push.
The disappearing info display is a nuisance and something I hope that Panasonic fixes ASAP, but otherwise I've been very happy with the results I'm getting with my GH3.
i.e. I shot an executive head-shot this afternoon, and was just amazed at the level of detail in the finished shots made with the 35-100mm f/2.8 lens. ( too much detail for the client if I blew the shots up, seeing every spec of dust on a person's face is weird )
Malibu, before you get your knickers in a knot...... the quote above means that in video mode, the camera is not up to an acceptable 'operational' standard. It does not mean that the images are not acceptable.
Dingo, I said that in video mode you sometimes have to press record twice, not in stills mode. While for the most part I can deal with the flaw, sometimes in high pressure situations I might press record then quickly check some audio........ the action starts and I look for the red Record indicator and realise that the camera is not recording. While I usually always check that the camera is recording, I also sometimes assume that the camera is recording as I've never come across a camera that has this bug.
Either way it's not acceptable and if Panasonic had have tested it in real world conditions before unleashing it on us, the flaw would have shown up immediately.
As for my 'conspiracy theories' as Malibu put it, its not only Panasonic that is at fault. Black Magic are about to release the Pocket Cam. It was advertised that the Pocket Cam would shoot RAW but on release, it will not have the capability. So they are going to release the camera anyway (unfinished) and finish it once the consumer has it. Lets say there is an issue with the development in the meantime and it becomes impossible for Black Magic to deliver an acceptable RAW recording. That means that everyone has to return their cameras for a refund or live with it. While its a hypothetical situation, it could happen.
Why don't camera manufacturers just develop their cameras and release them when they are completely happy with them and had them thoroughly tested rather than deliver an unfinished product to fit in with the Accountants and Marketing departments time frame?
Last edited: