a reminder...the g6 shoots sweep panorama, timelapse, stop motion . I haven't seen anyone else release a camera that is so versatile as the g6. The only thing it lacks imho are the high bitrate modes of the gh3. And I think it's a little too early to be saying there won't be a gh5 . If they continue their development in the same vein, pany will release a great next camera. I just hope they return to their multi-aspect ratio sensor .
GH13 GH5 Rumors
- Thread starter Zephyrnoid
- Start date
a reminder...the g6 shoots sweep panorama, timelapse, stop motion . I haven't seen anyone else release a camera that is so versatile as the g6. The only thing it lacks imho are the high bitrate modes of the gh3. And I think it's a little too early to be saying there won't be a gh5 . If they continue their development in the same vein, pany will release a great next camera. I just hope they return to their multi-aspect ratio sensor .
But it sure would be nice
"The most efficient new parameter within AVC-Ultra is by Panasonic called, AVC-LongG. AVC-LongG enables compression of video resolutions up to 1920 × 1080 @ 23.97, 25 and 29.97p, with 10 bits of pixel depth at 4:2:2 color sampling, at data rates as low as 25 Mbit / sec."
malibudutchie
Well-known member
Amen Thomas Smet - nail on the head. My Gh3's for $1200 apiece are in demand most days. My local TV station just bought 18 of them solely for promo work. At a third of the price of a Canon 5D mark III, the GH3 just might be the first disposable broadcast camera - keep it for a few years and update - suits me. The next model will have more features as will the model after that. At least I'm not spending $20K plus and left wanting. Those that expect everything for nothing should remember you can't buy Cartier at Costco.
But I'm not expecting the GH5 to come with features only found in a $25k camera. I'm not expecting everything for nothing. Im very happy with the GH3's current recording codecs but a GH3 with 10bit 422 high bit rate codec as the new GH5 (when released) would help it fall in line with other cameras at a similar price point.
MattRobertson
Well-known member
A 14-140 at f2.8?? Are you serious? That would be an insane amount of glass lol. With a zoom range that big not gonna happen
Zephyrnoid
Veteran
"a fantasy world when it comes to things like 10bit and 4:2:2 color"
..... why? HDV on Mini DV at less than $1000 was considered 'fantasy' 7 years ago.
Forget Chroma Key ( which is impossible at 4:2:0 and only fair at 4:2:2 ) for a minute
If you can't have latitude in grading, which at minimum needs REAL 4:2:2 capture, and is really only a dream at 4:4:4; then one of the most critical aspects of post is 'out the window' for anything more serious than weddings.
That's what causes some productions to gravitate to much pricier systems. It's not for everyone but [I can assure you cannot sell an inch of footage to Discovery at 4:2:2 or any broadcast feature or doc. much less at 4:2:0] REDACTED for INACCURACY. Sorry 'bout that
4K? I can live without for years. But the color space is the King.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v226/zephyrnoid/Picture2_zps7c7b6a7b.png
..... why? HDV on Mini DV at less than $1000 was considered 'fantasy' 7 years ago.
Forget Chroma Key ( which is impossible at 4:2:0 and only fair at 4:2:2 ) for a minute
If you can't have latitude in grading, which at minimum needs REAL 4:2:2 capture, and is really only a dream at 4:4:4; then one of the most critical aspects of post is 'out the window' for anything more serious than weddings.
That's what causes some productions to gravitate to much pricier systems. It's not for everyone but [I can assure you cannot sell an inch of footage to Discovery at 4:2:2 or any broadcast feature or doc. much less at 4:2:0] REDACTED for INACCURACY. Sorry 'bout that
4K? I can live without for years. But the color space is the King.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v226/zephyrnoid/Picture2_zps7c7b6a7b.png
Last edited:
That's not the case. The 5DII was used for years on everything up to prime time broadcasts and it doesn't record 10bit 422. How can you say 4:2:2 is not an acceptable colour space? HDCAM and any other true broadcast format (other than HDCAMSR) is 4:2:2.
Zephyrnoid
Veteran
Nice friendly article!
In 1972 after spending 6 months using my dad's Leica M3, I decided that I should take a second look at photography, after abandoning the idea at the age of 9 thanks to a bad xperience at my Grandfather's studio.
In 1973 I borrowed a friend's Olympus PenF. Loved it! "Oh gee! I opined. 1/2 frame 35mm Sooooooooooooo cute. Sooooooooooo compact and yet Soooooooooo eccentric! The Durst enlarger at school had no problem, it was the lens choices for enlarging that were a headache. So I never continued with it and embraced FF 35mm for the next 35 years.
The Lesson? Some formats are not meant to endure. Some ( not all ) oddballs just can't seem to fit in not matter what.
After spending 2 years researching M43 for VIDEO, I came to that same negative conclusion AGAIN, after having made that decision 35 years ago! Why?
For me....
1) Highly constrained lens selection at the wide end ( where my images mostly live)
2) Too deep a DOF necessitating extraordinarily fast lenses and or longer focal lengths than desired for certain shots.
So the magic 'bullet' sensor size? DX or Super35. Faster, Wider, Shallower DOF lenses and yet, still a bit more compact than FF.
M43 was and is a damned good VIDEO sensor size if you can deal with the shortcomings of 1) & 2) or they simply aren't an issue.
That article is a harbinger of the demise of M43. Not today but perhaps in the near future. As always, you may hold a differing opinion.
Last edited:
Zephyrnoid
Veteran
I stand corrected though will call on Monday to find out if these specs are still true:
"BROADCAST MASTERS
Sony HD Cam 1080i / 59.94, Stereo audio on channels 1 & 2, Dolby 5.1 mix expressed as Dolby E on channels 3 & 4.
(An exclusive stereo delivery will be accepted only with the prior permission of Discovery Canada.)
Delivery on XDCam HD 4:2:2 in the 50Mb, 1080i/ 59.94 format is also permissible.
Program content shall be closed captioned as defined in EIA-708-B and EIA-608B. Narrated description of visual action for the vision impaired should be provided. Descriptive video for High Definition should be delivered in stereo."
here......
http://www.discovery.ca/Article.aspx?aid=13726
I can't believe they still expect center-crop safe for 4:3
then again, 4:3SD is STILL the prevailing standard )
Zephyrnoid
Veteran
I stand corrected though will call on Monday to find out if these specs are still true:
"BROADCAST MASTERS
Sony HD Cam 1080i / 59.94, Stereo audio on channels 1 & 2, Dolby 5.1 mix expressed as Dolby E on channels 3 & 4.
(An exclusive stereo delivery will be accepted only with the prior permission of Discovery Canada.)
Delivery on XDCam HD 4:2:2 in the 50Mb, 1080i/ 59.94 format is also permissible.
I can't believe they still expect center-crop safe for 4:3
While that does state that 4:2:2 is perfectly acceptable (no network I know of will reject an HDCAM master), it is also the specs for Broadcast Masters. It does not mention anything about acquisition formats.
Zephyrnoid
Veteran
Like I said. I'll call them Monday
BTW- Here are BBC Requirements FYI ... Page6
"2 General Quality Requirements
2.1 Picture Quality
The picture must be well lit and reasonably but not artificially sharp.
The picture must be free of excessive noise, grain and digital compression artefacts.
The picture must be free of excessive flare, reflections, lens dirt, markings and obstructions (e.g. lens hood),
and lens aberrations.
Movement must appear reasonably smooth and continuous, and must not give rise to distortions or break-up
to moving objects, or cause large changes in resolution.
The picture must be free of excessive black crushing and highlight compression. Hard clipping of highlights
(e.g. by legalisers) must not cause visible artefacts on screen.
There must be no noticeable horizontal or vertical aliasing, i.e. jagged lines, field or frame rate fluctuations in
fine detail.
Colour rendition, especially skin tones, must be consistent throughout, and a realistic representation of the
scene portrayed unless it is altered as an editorially essential visual effect.
The picture must be stable and continuous - i.e. no jumps, movements, shifts in level or position.
There must be no visible contouring / artefacts caused by digital processing. Quantisation noise must not be
apparent.
There must be no noticeable spurious signals or artefacts e.g. streaking, ringing, smear, echoes, overshoots,
moiré, hum, cross-talk etc.
2.2 Sound Quality
Sound must be recorded with appropriately placed microphones, giving minimum background noise and
without peak distortion.
The audio must be free of spurious signals such as clicks, noise, hum and any analogue distortion.
The audio must be reasonably continuous and smoothly mixed and edited.
Audio levels must be appropriate to the scene portrayed and dynamic range must not be excessive. They
must be suitable for the whole range of domestic listening situations.
Stereo audio must be appropriately balanced and free from phase differences which cause audible
cancellation in mono.
The audio must not show dynamic and/or frequency response artefacts as a result of the action of noise
reduction or low bit rate coding systems.
3 Technical Requirements - Video
3.1 Video Standards
3.1.1 High Definition Format
Programmes should be delivered on HDCamSR:
• 1920 x 1080 pixels in an aspect ratio of 16:9
• 25 frames per second (50 fields) interlaced - now known as 1080i/25.
• colour sub-sampled at a ratio of 4:2:2
The HD format is fully specified in ITU-R BT.709-5 Part 2.
I'm totally blown away by the fact that on the one hand we're talking about shooting 4K for 4K TV's and yet the BBC also ( Page 7 - not shown) STILL accepts material in SD vs HD.
It's like HD is a 'niche' market still.
Im very familiar with the BBC's requirements. Like I said, there is nothing wrong with 4:2:2 (as seen in your long BBC cut and paste) and the BBC accept it for delivery. Again, what you have cut and pasted from the BBC website is a spec for DELIVERY. Acquisition formats are a completely different matter. I know for a fact, because I was forced to shoot HD on Sony Z1's a few times for a BBC broadcast, that the BBC wont reject a programme because an 8bit 4:2:0 format was used in the acquisition.
Your statement that a 4:2:2 colour space is barely good enough for a cameras recording format is way off the mark.
Your statement that a 4:2:2 colour space is barely good enough for a cameras recording format is way off the mark.
To be honest, I don't care what the GH5,6,7,8 & 9 give us any more. With companies like BlackMagic now developing cameras that we want at amazing prices, I can see myself making the jump sooner rather than later. Yep, BM have had their issues but considering that until very recently they were a company that had never made a camera I think they have hit the ground running. They take note and deliver what the user wants (albeit with a few delays ;-) ) and are free to do so without worrying about standing on another departments toes like Panasonic and Sony do with their Video Camera and Pro divisions. For me, for work there will be the BM cameras and for a camera that I can take photos and video of the kids with I may keep the GH3.
Rolf Silber
Veteran
In general EBU (European Broadcasting Union) requests 4:2:2 50 Mbit for inter, 100 Mbit for intra but allows also AVCHD 4:2:0 above 35 Mbit.
but
it allows lower standards for doc, news, specialised cameras, situations when material can not be gathered otherwise and if material from such cameras is not more than 33% of a programme usually. AVCHD 4:2:0 8 bit at 24 Mbit can be okay. But while restricting this "in general" broadcaster may also make other decisions. Which leaves a lot of wriggle room.
In the real world also in Germany the big networks will not reject such material if it's good and the technical reasons for a probable rejection are overridden by creative reasons. We even used some material from my GH13 alongside a RED MX and later from GH2 & AG-AF alongside an Alexa. Yet it would be appropriate to check beforehand if you work on the continent.
http://tech.ebu.ch/docs/r/r118.pdf
malibudutchie
Well-known member
All the big networks are guided by content. A good example is the recent number of docos featuring helmetcam footage of the Iraq/Afghan wars. BBC's "Our War" series and "Restrepo" (US) are two excellent programs, interspersed with interviews shot on broadcast quality cams. Discovery seem the toughest to crack, but if you have THE story and the pics they will run it. As far as BM goes I wouldn't shoot on that brick with batteries if you paid me double.
Your saying, if someone hired you for a shoot with the BMCC you would say no? Why?
I always use a rig and external EVF when shooting with my GH3 so the BMCC form factor is not really an issue for me. The BMCC's internal/non removable battery is not an issue for me either. I have a stack of VLock batteries so having a Vlock battery powering the BMCC & EVF works for me. With the BMCC's internal battery, I could even do a Vlock battery change and the camera would keep recording (yes, i would lose the EVF momentarily).
Personally for me, I need 1080p50 which is why I chose the GH3. As soon as BM bring 1080p50 to the table, I'll switch. But thats just for my personal shoots, a lot of the time the camera I shoot on is dictated by the type of production and hired in.
As we know, at the $1000 to $4000 price range no camera is perfect but the BMCC comes close in the important areas.
Last edited:
Thomas Smet
Veteran
Lol are you serious? That statement along clearly shows you don't know what you are talking about. 4:2:0 is insanely far from impossible to pull a key. 4:2:2 not good enough? Perhaps you may have heard of a small FX heavy movie called Sat Wars Epidode II that was shot on a SONY F900 with HDCAM. HDCAM itself is only 3:1:1 but they did use a direct SDI capture for 4:2:2. While yes a higher chroma sampling is better in no way is it impossible to use 4:2:0 or 4:2:2. People have been shooting amazing FX work with 4:2:2 and even 4:2:0 for years. Single chip cameras cannot resolve 4:4:4 color anyway and at best you get a form of interpolated 4:2:0. The only way to really get 4:4:4 on a camera is to have a 3 chip camera with a 4:4:4 recording format.
You do also realize 4:2:2 is the broadcast standard that HDCAM SR and DVCPROHD and XDCAM records. Very few cameras shoot 4:4:4 and only cinema cameras do so right now for the most part.
malibudutchie
Well-known member
As I said a brick with batteries, plus I've got my own gear which I charge for. The BMCC is a box, not a camera, it's got many inherent problems least of which being really poor ergonomics. You need an accessory for every facet of operation. The trade-off is RAW. The mic is basic, poor battery, the super 16 sensor makes lens selection difficult, etc etc. Then you need an amped up edit system and huge storage for the 6-7gb per minute of footage. Why shoot all this when TV is for the most part still broadcast in SD. Versatile it is not. But as a run and gun expert you'd know all that.
Cory Braun
Well-known member
I only use the mic as a reference track (although for some jobs, XLR and audio levels would have been great), I love the built in battery, use it so I can hot swap external batteries (I now wish every camera I have, had a built in battery), and the super 16 sensor allows for much less expensive cinema lenses. The camera definitely has some problems, but I wouldn't consider any that you've listed as a problem.