GH13 GH5 Rumors

...I think it's explained by Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle

Ps.....I also think the bmpcc resolves many of these issues...but not all !
 
Last edited:
Zephyrnoid said:
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.

The beta's only began with the digital paradigm.

If a person wants to pay for and own in-betweens, that's thier perrogative.

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 ;)
Click to expand...

First off, no offense here, but if folks can't tell the difference between your footage shot on a POS 720p Flip and a GH2/GH3 with good glass then I think that speaks more to your skills than the camera. Unless you are just putting the GH3 in iA and pointing it at your cat...

Next, there have always been cycles to products. A product is released and then incremental improvements are made for a few years. Then the product is enhanced at a larger degree (redesigned) and a new line/model is released.

The best example is cars. There will be an all new redesigned VW Jetta. Then for next few years that Jetta will see minor tweaks and improvements. Then after 5-7 years the Jetta will undergo a complete redesign.

Same goes for Apple iMacs and MacBooks, TVs went from Plasma to LCD to LED....and same goes for cameras.

You also can't compare product release cyles of today to what happened in the 70s or 80s. We have China building a new factory every 15 minutes. The global economy is much larger today. There is more consumption.

As you said, it's up to consumers to decide which point in the product life cycle they should buy. Some want the latest and greatest. Some do not want a v1.0.
 
"Art is never finished, only abandoned" (allegedly) Leonardo da Vinci.

"Cameras are never finished, only released" Anonymous.
 
...we should probably hope we never see the perfect camera...because it will be the transhuman cybernetic encapsulation of our vision and thoughts....a technology where google glasses are just a primitive attempt.
 
kurth said:
...we should probably hope we never see the perfect camera...because it will be the transhuman cybernetic encapsulation of our vision and thoughts....a technology where google glasses are just a primitive attempt.
Click to expand...

ABSOLUTELY CORRECT ;) but why would you assert ..."we should probably hope we never see the perfect camera" ?

Is everyone sold on the concept of an endless parade of EXTERNAL assistive devices?

Has anyone been paying attention to embedded computers?

The holly grail of assistive vision to the blind IS cybernetic vision, right before we figure out how to clone organs in place for those that loose them or were never born with them.

In a fantasy world. mine that is- telepathy replaces media inter-mediated communications- AKA Language.


But we're a ways off that fantasy and sure enough- forums will cease to exist at that point too :laugh:
 
Rolf Silber said:
"Art is never finished, only abandoned" (allegedly) Leonardo da Vinci.

"Cameras are never finished, only released" Anonymous.
Click to expand...

Though indeed, some of LDV's unfinished inventions had to wait nearly 500 years for materialization; in his lifetime he finished a lot of work and perfectly too- and let's not confuse the artist's tools with the art itself.
 
Zephyrnoid said:
ABSOLUTELY CORRECT ;) but why would you assert ..."we should probably hope we never see the perfect camera" ?

Is everyone sold on the concept of an endless parade of EXTERNAL assistive devices?

Has anyone been paying attention to embedded computers?

The holly grail of assistive vision to the blind IS cybernetic vision, right before we figure out how to clone organs in place for those that loose them or were never born with them.

In a fantasy world. mine that is- telepathy replaces media inter-mediated communications- AKA Language.


But we're a ways off that fantasy and sure enough- forums will cease to exist at that point too :laugh:
Click to expand...

Jumping with boots on into a gibsonesque robocop world is a very naive attitude....so, yep....I'm completely sold on that endless parade. If you don't recognize the ethical dilemma inherent in transhumanism , then read this ....
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/8.04/joy_pr.html
...you did see The Terminator, right ??
 
"Jumping with boots on into a gibsonesque robocop world is a very naive attitude"
LOL. Let's see here..... we' re in which Century? The 21st Century? ALREADY ?
Back in the 60's, when I first remember watching TV, and reading sci-fi books, everything we're experiencing today was PURE FANTASY. I was very naive and imaginative it seems.
A flunky at Math, I read 'Danny Dunn and the Homework Machine' (1958) and I opined... "Oh God! Please, Yes! a machine that automatically does arithmetic calculations ( I was 9 )"
a very naive attitude

In my off-time I have contributed to 'The Institute For The Future' a private future-think tank. That spawned TED and the history of technology over the past 50 years has been all about imagination.
If someone doesn't imagine it- IT WILL NOT HAPPEN on its own.

In all fairness. There is a good reason for some of the delays in technology development and convergence. Breakthroughs frequently require an intersection of technologies.
Every major tech breakthrough follows that rule.
We're just waiting patiently for that to occur in that certain niche of the video camera market. I have no idea when it will happen but it's not a a very naive attitude that makes it arrive.
 
malibudutchie said:
. LDV was THE man. My favourite arty quote "Every second, everything changes"...Henri Cartier Bresson - but what would he know, he never shot video. Would've liked to see him with a GH3.
Click to expand...

What I loved most often more than the "finished" paintings are the first drawings, sketches, scribbles, notes of Leonardo. Watching the unfinished teaches us a lot more than the paintings itself about the creative process.

http://www.drawingsofleonardo.org/

GH5 will only be "the sketch" or beta-version of the GH 6, 7, 8. Arri BL 35 was the "beta-version" of Arri BL III..... Every piece of art is unfinished for principal reasons. So is every piece of equipment. So is everything else.

Because, indeed: "Every second, everything changes". Panta rei - quantum foam is bubbling all it's way in time .... ;-)
 
kurth said:
well me too ...for 40 years ...represented by worldclass galleries...etc....and vtwiz's statement (I have never looked at a painting in a gallery and thought, wow I wonder what type of paint or what type of canvas was used? ) is simply wrong as well as contradicting his attempted metaphor of aligning painting with cinematography . It's perhaps correct that a painter doesn't care to discern what type of canvas ..or foundation the painting is on, because it could be on wood or metal or any of hundreds of materials which would be apparently obvious....but all painters , except for perhaps yourself, will , after appreciating or not, an image , will attempt to analyze the medium.

The first thing they look at is whether it's oil, acrylic, tempera, gouache, etc etc . And since I know hundreds if not thousands of other artists, I know this to be true. And while it's not important , if the medium fits the work, it's still important to the growth of an artist to be able to dissect the methodology of other artists. And also among painters , there's the same type of condescending attitude about mediums. That's why acrylics are known as the fast food medium.

And I venture it's exactly the same with cinematographers . In fact, I know it's the same with cinematographers ! First they discern if it's digital or film. If film, then what format. If digital , they want to know if it was a Red or an Arri, and if not what other underling produced such an acceptable image. Or the reverse could be true, for example , as was discussed among cinematographers over Searching for Sugarman, in the what appeared to be s8 footage that was actually shot on an iphone, and many other examples of degraded imagery as artform.

And if we're talking about pure imagery, I dare you to watch the work of Bill Viola and not want to dissect his methodology. Or go even further back to the work of Peter Campus. Every artist should have a full palette at their disposal...aka even a pxl2000.

Now this isn't belittling the alternative philosophy, as demonstrated in public television, that content is king , however content and subject matter is one thing...and imagery is another animal all together.
Click to expand...

Kurth you make a good point, reminds me of a super important lecture we had (in 3D class, 3d like sculpture not maya ;) ) and the instructor was underlining the use of material and choosing the material for its intrinsic quality, whether you want to use that as it is or change it. The medium definitely has its place. This can be an incredible discussion. I think the point I was trying to make is that in year 2, I would buy every markmaking device i could afford, to try, and yes even thinking if I drew my final project on reeves bfk it would turn out better than if i drew it on cheap photocopy paper. I understand the place that has, but for me, personally, now, when I have to draw something, (again this is me) I will grab the closest thing around. Given the choice and luxury, sure I would pick and choose wisely, and I guess this is where I must make a distinction between buying a product and buying a feature, this is brands don't really matter to me. But if I don't have those options, I can still do my thing with something that makes a mark on something else. In your point's defense, I do believe one cannot get there unless they go through the intrinsic qualities (features that lead to certain aesthetic in camera world i spose is th parallel) of the media available. But if you know what medium x ends up like, and you don't have it, knowing about it allows you to recreate it (sadly it may be more work but if you don't have the option) with whatever you got. I guess I cannot bring myself to depend on it when it comes to drawing. Not painting, more drawing as I've done that more.

I totally get your point, if you wanna take this further I'm all ears (or fingers for that matter as I'm typing)
 
Rolf Silber said:
Actually from a philosophical point of view a non-existent camera could be seen as existent the moment we discuss it. Just not - yet - arrived in physical form. Or never arriving while heavily expected and discussed (and dismissed). Something like Schroedinger's cat in camera form.
Click to expand...

The battery is both dead and alive until you check the charge light.

My BMC has arrived AND hasn't arrived until I check my mailbox.

I can go on forever. Rolf, you're awesome.
 
Just because a new GH is not numbered 4 doesn't mean it's not the 4th version. It's like the bizarre practice of not naming a 13th floor in hotels and apartment blocks but skipping to 14 because it's bad luck. I still count it as the 13th floor, just as the next GH will be the 4. Seriously.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top