HDSLR: New MFT camera to be announced on June 5, 2024??

[NorBro]

The irony of it all is how everyone uses 32-bit but the 1% (but not all of it) working on some of the largest productions in the world are still using 24-bit from the Industrial Revolution. But as they say...if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Although I imagine the next generation is going to be fully integrated in 32-bit workflows because it doesn't make any sense not to use something so great and so incredibly useful if you have it.

 

[IronFilm]

Regressive, stale or lousy viewfinders appear to be Panasonic's CRIPPLE HAMMER of choice.

It's very unreasonable to claim that Panasonic used the "cripple hammer" on the GH3.

Cripple hammers only exist to product a cheaper camera from eating into the sales of a more expensive camera. Such as Canon was famous for doing.

This obviously can not apply to Panasonic! The GH3 was their top #1 camera at the time, what camera was being projected by the "cripple hammer" when it was used on the GH3?

 

[IronFilm]

I have been using my Zoom F6 for a few years now and try to use a full 32bit workflow as much as I can. I think the end audio result sounds better. More info means better sounding EQ and effects etc.. in the DAW. 32bit out of the DAW into my NLE. This works well with 24bit source files as well but why not use 32bit if it is capable? The file sizes are not restrictive.

If you're doing the full workflow from pre to production to post, then you're not the Sound Department. Which is what I was referring to.

Yeah, I can kinda see a purpose for 32bit if someone is a rushed OMB who is also doing all Post in house as well. But that's not how the Sound Dept works on a shoot.

The irony of it all is how everyone uses 32-bit but the 1% (but not all of it) working on some of the largest productions in the world are still using 24-bit from the Industrial Revolution. But as they say...if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

I definitely don't think it is "everyone". Neither is it confined to only the Top 1% of the biggest productions.

In fact I'd say it's more like 99% of full time Sound Mixers are primarily using 24bit, not 32bit.

Might this change in the long run? Sure. But that day is many many years away.

32bit isn't solving any problems for us.

 

[Ron Evans]

The value of 32bit float is for single user shooting. Means the user does not have to bother about setting levels for audio at all. Just switch on and press record. That is how I use my F3. Doesn't matter if someone whispers or shouts all will work in editing without clipping or noise. With the new XLR2 unit the GH7 can record 4 channels of 32bit float in the video file so already in sync. Could be something like a Zoom stereo Pro and two wireless Lav mics into the xlr inputs. To me this is the most valuable improvement for the GH7. Perfect for a single person interviewing two people. Single shot of both using 5.7 or 5.8K open gate, wireless lav mics on each person, stereo mic on camera as backup. To me the rest is the GH6 I already have now. I don't use continuous AF and I am not going to use ProRes RAW ( BRAW would be different). I can record both PRoRes RAW and BRAW already from the HDMI and 20min recording on CFexpress is of no use to my long 2 hour shoots. Not interested in Frame.io or the LUT library. I am not going to use the ARRi LUT either but could use on my GH6 which I think will retain the value of the GH6 for some.

The individual features of the GH7 are set up for particular people for which there is great value I am sure . I can also see that for those people the other new features will have no value !!

 

[NorBro]

I definitely don't think it is "everyone". Neither is it confined to only the Top 1% of the biggest productions.

In fact I'd say it's more like 99% of full time Sound Mixers are primarily using 24bit, not 32bit.

Might this change in the long run? Sure. But that day is many many years away.

32bit isn't solving any problems for us.

Yeah, that's what I meant in that post...most professional sound mixers seem not to be using 32-bit and it's mind boggling. lol

But so many others do, it's so useful. Even in your firmware post the company acknowledged that people were waiting for a bunch of stuff and they delivered, with 32-bit starting the list.

It's not like one is pressed for media space with 8K vs 1080p.

It's like...just use it! It imports and edits just like 24-bit but you have the unlimited headroom even if there is a one-in-a-million misstep at work.

 

[Alex H.]

Yeah, that's what I meant in that post...most professional sound mixers seem not to be using 32-bit and it's mind boggling. lol

But so many others do, it's so useful. Even in your firmware post the company acknowledged that people were waiting for a bunch of stuff and they delivered, with 32-bit starting the list.

It's not like one is pressed for media space with 8K vs 1080p.

It's like...just use it! It imports and edits just like 24-bit but you have the unlimited headroom even if there is a one-in-a-million misstep at work.

Most productions still send media specs that call for 24/48 BWF. Deliverables are still submitted at 24/48, and it’s still the standardized workflow in the industry. I have yet to work a show that asks for 32-bit float. And the reality is that proper gain staging maximizes 24-bit audio and there’s nothing lost. Post teams that aren’t expecting 32-bit, and/or aren’t experienced in handling it, are also going to be thrown for a loop if they’re sent 32-bit float files that they didn’t ask for.

The other reality is that the dynamic range of wireless systems still falls well within the dynamic range of 24/48 audio. 32-bit float doesn’t really solve any issues there.

The most recent update to the Sound Devices 8-series/Scorpio firmware added 32-bit float recording, but only to the ISO tracks and not to the mix. This actually makes a bit of sense, not just because of processing and hardware limitations, but because the places where 32-bit float comes in clutch at this point are typically edited and mixed down later: music recording, and SFX for sound design.

I use 32-bit float often for SFX recording with my MixPre packages. It allows recording of very low-level sources, all the way up to race cars, trains, firearms, and explosions. But I haven’t updated my 888 firmware yet (gonna let others work out the bugs first) and continue to run happily in 24-bit. There are also plenty of 6-series mixer/recorders in service out there (I’m currently on day 8 of 19 on a series using 688s), and even a respectable number of 788Ts still working.

There may come a day when 32-bit float becomes more the rule than the exception for dialog, but by then I fear most professional mixers will have been replaced by the cheap DIY solutions and AI-assisted audio post. Until then, I’m going to keep doing what I do and charging the rates I charge for the skills I bring to the table.

 

[NorBro]

AI's coming...lol, j/k (thank you for the write-up)

 

[Tom Roper]

The value of 32bit float is for single user shooting. Means the user does not have to bother about setting levels for audio at all. Just switch on and press record.

That would be fantastic to have in a regular recorder, like the tascam DR10L lav mic or other field recorders. Sounds like a pretty amazing update for Panasonic with the GH7. The wants will never stop. I'd like a Panasonic full frame with 8k 60 fps, 4K120, internal raw, PD autofocus, IBIS, 14 stops DR and 32 bit audio. They obviously could if the cartel would let them. (Prayers to DLD wherever he is..)

 

[Peter C.]

Depends on the job but in many situations 32 bit is a helpful if you're working by yourself and shooting the video is your emphasis. In my deposition work my main focus is monitoring the sound and I have no need of 32 bit. Btw the GH7 doesn't hand it to you on a silver platter. You must buy the hotshoe XLR adapter. Like I said before the camera manufactures are woefully behind it this respect.

 

[hotchkiss]

Panasonic always nailed broadcast cameras.

I absolutely agree. What a great track record.

They are an engineering first type of company and mirrorless and cinema are kind of 'cool' in comparison. Which is not their strength.

I beg to differ. They have been no slouch in this segment either. Their track record of mirrorless and cinema cameras is amazing.

I just think they are understaffed/funded from upper management to some extent.

Understaffed or not, their decision making about market segments is what irks me. This is a strategy problem, not a resource problem. The mirrorless hybrid market is over saturated (particularly FF), yet all they seem to have up their sleeve is iterative and seriously overlapping product lines. The G9II and GH series come to mind- not to mention the slew of Panasonics FF hybrids. This scattershot product lineup has been going on much longer than the market decline of the last couple of years. For me, this dynamic makes it difficult to invest even further into Panny gear and eco systems. Regardless, I'm just not interested in sinking more money into a mirrorless hybrid system, no matter how good they are... and Panasonics are great within this context.

My frustration is about Panasonic, but possibly even more so with the camera landscape as a whole. There is a huge missing segment of cameras. We have "cinema cameras" with or without internal ND's or viewfinders etc. to --------------> mirrorless hybrids- and nothing much in between. As poorly implemented as the DVX200 was, that camera ticks many boxes for me. Quick operation, no lens changes, no franken-rigging, built in ND's. I can operate so much quicker with camcorders than hybrids. Sure, "Cinema" cams are an improvement, but many jobs are really impacted by lens changes

For all of the talk otherwise, there are fewer choices than ever. It's just that there is an over abundance of fewer choices.

The industry is so fragmented that I am sure it is tough to know what to make these days.

 

[Tom Roper]

In my deposition work my main focus is monitoring the sound and I have no need of 32 bit.

My thought would have been if there is no need for monitoring the sound with 32 bit.

 

[hotchkiss]

It's very unreasonable to claim that Panasonic used the "cripple hammer" on the GH3.

Cripple hammers only exist to product a cheaper camera from eating into the sales of a more expensive camera. Such as Canon was famous for doing.

This obviously can not apply to Panasonic! The GH3 was their top #1 camera at the time, what camera was being projected by the "cripple hammer" when it was used on the GH3?

I specifically used the term "cripple hammer" in the context of the GH3's viewfinder. Have you ever used a GH3 viewfinder? It was a few steps backwards from the GH2. I'm being charitable. While there have been some good/better ones, the quality of Panasonics VF's have been inconsistent at best.

 

[Bassman2003]

I absolutely agree. What a great track record.

I beg to differ. They have been no slouch in this segment either. Their track record of mirrorless and cinema cameras is amazing.

Understaffed or not, their decision making about market segments is what irks me. This is a strategy problem, not a resource problem. The mirrorless hybrid market is over saturated (particularly FF), yet all they seem to have up their sleeve is iterative and seriously overlapping product lines. The G9II and GH series come to mind- not to mention the slew of Panasonics FF hybrids. This scattershot product lineup has been going on much longer than the market decline of the last couple of years. For me, this dynamic makes it difficult to invest even further into Panny gear and eco systems. Regardless, I'm just not interested in sinking more money into a mirrorless hybrid system, no matter how good they are... and Panasonics are great within this context.

My frustration is about Panasonic, but possibly even more so with the camera landscape as a whole. There is a huge missing segment of cameras. We have "cinema cameras" with or without internal ND's or viewfinders etc. to --------------> mirrorless hybrids- and nothing much in between. As poorly implemented as the DVX200 was, that camera ticks many boxes for me. Quick operation, no lens changes, no franken-rigging, built in ND's. I can operate so much quicker with camcorders than hybrids. Sure, "Cinema" cams are an improvement, but many jobs are really impacted by lens changes

For all of the talk otherwise, there are fewer choices than ever. It's just that there is an over abundance of fewer choices.

The lack of choices of the camera you mention makes me think the market is small for this type of build. The whole industry has been piggy backing off of established still camera designs to cover R&D and for fear of releasing a product that does not sell well. "See, it take great photos as well...". The DVX200 looked good by design but did not seem to sell well. I played around with one for a day or two and I think it had a weak imaging sensor. Not great dynamic range and not great low light capabilities along with a pretty slow lens compared to what folks were wanting/expecting. So Panasonic put forth a meh effort and decided to abandon the idea. Sort of like AF-100 which could have been quite useful had they continued to improve it.

As the industry shrinks and YouTubers are seen as a bonafide market segment to design and sell to, the odds of getting your camera seem to have gone down. FX6 seems like your closest choice.

 

[Peter C.]

The problem with the DVX200 is that it was bigger and heavier with lower image quality compared to the newer 1" sensors. Everyone has moved to 1" 4k camcorders. All the camcorders use the same slow variable zoom lenses, not good in low light, and bad auto focus. In the past a much wider audience used camcorders, now a days only event videographers and lower end broadcast would use a camcorder. So the camera companies aren't putting their R&D into them. If Panasonic put all the improvements found in the GH7 into a DVX200 mark II, that would be great. Better low light performance, Dynamic range boost, PD focus, 32bit audio, etc. But how many people would buy such a camcorder? M43 dof is in a bit of a middle ground, it doesn't provide shallow dof like a FF and it doesn't have deep dof that is often needed for event work.

 

[hojomo]

A BGH2 is probably the only other form factor Panasonic would put these same basic guts into.

 

[IronFilm]

The value of 32bit float is for single user shooting.

For sure, I do agree 32bit audio is handy for OMB shooters who will also be handling Post themselves.
That is the use case for 32bit, but I just wanted to highlight the broader context of the relevance of 32bit in filmmaking for the Sound Department (or rather, it's not relevant).

I do think it's nice that the GH7 has 96KHz 32bit audio recorded into the video files themselves:

Didn't realize it was offering 96KHz, that's nice! (although it's also total complete overkill. But hey, a nice change to see a camera doing audio in an overkill manner for once!)

Yeah, that's what I meant in that post...most professional sound mixers seem not to be using 32-bit and it's mind boggling. lol

It's not at all mind boggling when you realize 32bit provides no benefit at all (or only very marginal and rare gains) for us.

Am sure in the long run 32bit will eventually become the norm that's expected on a normal film set from the Sound Department, as even very small gains are worth it if there is no downside to it (which isn't the case currently, but eventually there will be no downside to using 32bit).

But that day could easily be a decade plus away from happening. 32bit as the default expected standard is certainly not happening within the next five years.

I am not going to use the ARRi LUT either but could use on my GH6 which I think will retain the value of the GH6 for some.

Definitely, I think it's great they've released the ARRI LogC3 for the GH6. If you don't need the features of the GH7 (such as the awesome AF, because you're using manual focus cine lenses) but want a compact and cheap crash cam for your ARRI A Cam, then the GH6 will be perfect!

But so many others do, it's so useful. Even in your firmware post the company acknowledged that people were waiting for a bunch of stuff and they delivered, with 32-bit starting the list.

That's just the usual marketing speak, of course every company always says a new firmware update is "much-anticipated".

But just for that one firmware update (let alone all the many other firmware updates that Sound Devices is pumping out) then 32bit doesn't even rank in the Top 3 of importance for actual 8 Series users.

#1 would likely be the Daylight Mode, as since Day 1 this has been a hotly demanded feature especially from former 6 Series users. This would by far be the #1 most complained about missing feature (even if I personally didn't think it was such a big deal, I thought there are more important issues to address first).

For me personally, then by far the most exciting feature of this release was finally getting playback to headphones only. This was so very annoying not having this! Been wanting this myself since Day 1, been a major annoyance.

Even things like the SD-Remote Routing Matrix, which even my Zaxcom Maxx or the old Sound Devices 788T has, is truly fantastic to see now for the 8 Series. Record folder renaming is also handy to have to and genuinely useful.

All of these are features I'm certain I'll be using many times before I ever need to use 32bit even once.

It's not like one is pressed for media space with 8K vs 1080p.

Nothing to do with media space, it's that 32bit doesn't solve any problems for us in the Sound Department.

Remember three key facts:
1) we're usually operating in a 100% wireless world, having 32bit after a signal has already clipped is utterly pointless and solves nothing.
2) 24bits is already a huge dynamic range. To give an extreme exaggerated example for people in the Camera Department, imagine if everyone owned a camera with a billion stops of dynamic range, and then tomorrow a camera came out with a zillion stops of dynamic range. Would people rush to buy that new camera? Nope! Because it is not solving for them any problem that their current camera has.
3) in extremely rare niche scenarios where we might want even more, we can always very easily bracket an audio source, just like a photographer might bracket photos to get super high dynamic range so they can thus perfectly expose both the ultra bright burning fires of hell and the deepest darkest depths of Satan's soul all at the same time

It's like...just use it! It imports and edits just like 24-bit

Unfortunately not true, it is very common to hear complaints from editors about how 32bit files have screwed up with their established workflows. For instance, the "32bit" AAF export option in various NLEs is Integer and not Float. Just to give one of many possible issues people might encounter.

Unless Post has explicitly requested 32bit and/or you've very rigorously tested every step of the Post workflow with them beforehand, you should never ever be turning over 32bit audio files to them.

 

[IronFilm]

The most recent update to the Sound Devices 8-series/Scorpio firmware added 32-bit float recording, but only to the ISO tracks and not to the mix. This actually makes a bit of sense, not just because of processing and hardware limitations, but because the places where 32-bit float comes in clutch at this point are typically edited and mixed down later: music recording, and SFX for sound design.

I use 32-bit float often for SFX recording with my MixPre packages. It allows recording of very low-level sources, all the way up to race cars, trains, firearms, and explosions.

Yup, 32bit is handy for SFX users. But that's a role that's outside what the Sound Department usually does, and normally is a role within Audio Post itself.

But I haven’t updated my 888 firmware yet (gonna let others work out the bugs first) and continue to run happily in 24-bit.

Definitely agreeing myself with this, not upgrading to v10.01 just yet! There have already been reported some issues with it.

I'd much rather upgrade to a firmware release that's a minor update of just small bug fixes with zero "big" features in the firmware release. Let other people jump onto using first the "big releases". (even though the v10.01 does greatly tempted me...)

There are also plenty of 6-series mixer/recorders in service out there (I’m currently on day 8 of 19 on a series using 688s), and even a respectable number of 788Ts still working.

Yes, almost kinda surprising how many 788T recorders are still in use, not just on small / medium sized productions, but even on quite big productions. It's a credit to how amazing the 788T was for its time!

Definitely think I'm going to get a full decade of usage from my 833 before I upgrade it.

As well as the huge number of 6 Series recorders still in use, got to remember that not a single Zaxcom recorder does 32bit. And Zaxcom is the #2 player after Sound Devices. (I myself have my Zaxcom Maxx as my secondary / back up recorder to my Sound Devices 833. I even prefer my Maxx over my 833 in some cases, and have used the Maxx on a couple different Web Series within the last year)

We'll need to first see the vast majority of these upgraded to the latest models that can support 32bit (which isn't even an option if you're a Zaxcom user!) before 32bit can become the industry standard.

There may come a day when 32-bit float becomes more the rule than the exception for dialog, but by then I fear most professional mixers will have been replaced by the cheap DIY solutions and AI-assisted audio post. Until then, I’m going to keep doing what I do and charging the rates I charge for the skills I bring to the table.

That's a very real possibility I hadn't thought about until just now. The elimination of the Sound Dept might happen first before the expectation of 32bit happens.

As it could be a decade plus until 32bit becomes "the industry standard" expected by default from everyone.
But it might also be true that in a decade-ish from now that the Sound Dept as we know it no longer exists, or at least has been slashed down in size to being 90% less common than it is now.

I hope not! But advanced in audio AI are happening so fast, it's rather hard to predict what the world will be like in another decade plus from now.

That would be fantastic to have in a regular recorder, like the tascam DR10L lav mic or other field recorders.

The Tascam DR10L Pro has 32bit.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1773575-REG/tascam_dr_10l_pro_personal_recorder.html

As does the Tentacle Track E

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1506356-REG/tentacle_sync_track_e_pocket_audio.html

Lots of prosumer recorders have 32bit (all of the latest Zoom F Series & MixPre series), plus now the pro level Sound Devices 8 Series has 32bit too. (as of a few days ago in the latest firmware update)

 

[IronFilm]

yet all they seem to have up their sleeve is iterative and seriously overlapping product lines. The G9II and GH series come to mind

Iterative / overlapping product lines are the cheapest products to create from a R&D perspective.
So from a commercial perspective, or making new models to push sales with, then it could make 100% sense what they're doing. Plus it always them to do market segmentation as well, which is also a smart move for Panasonic.

I expect Panasonic crunched the numbers and realized they can sell many more cameras in total by having two models (G9mk2 & GH7) than if they released just one combined super model .

A BGH2 is probably the only other form factor Panasonic would put these same basic guts into.

Hopefully this time finally with a zero lag SDI output! (ideally two independent SDI outputs)

My thought would have been if there is no need for monitoring the sound with 32 bit.

32bit doesn't kill the need to still listen to your audio!

If you had a camera with a zillion stops of dynamic range, does that mean you no longer need to look at your camera's monitor?

I specifically used the term "cripple hammer" in the context of the GH3's viewfinder. Have you ever used a GH3 viewfinder? It was a few steps backwards from the GH2. I'm being charitable. While there have been some good/better ones, the quality of Panasonics VF's have been inconsistent at best.

Who knows the reasons for the GH3 viewfinder, but it certainly wasn't "cripple hammer" reasoning to protect a higher priced camera.

Maybe there were supply chain issues in sourcing enough of the previous viewfinder that was being used? Or programing compatibility issues with the new design of the other parts being used in the new GH3? Or maybe they were feeling nervous about the GH3 already being their most expensive ever MFT camera, that they didn't want to push the price even higher, and misjudged where they could skip on costs. Who knows, a zillion possible other reasons that are not "the cripple hammer".

The DVX200 looked good by design but did not seem to sell well. I played around with one for a day or two and I think it had a weak imaging sensor. Not great dynamic range and not great low light capabilities along with a pretty slow lens compared to what folks were wanting/expecting. So Panasonic put forth a meh effort and decided to abandon the idea. Sort of like AF-100 which could have been quite useful had they continued to improve it.

Yeah the DVX200 reused the GH4 sensor inside it.
If only the DVX200 had a MFT Mount, then people could have slapped on T0.95 lenses onto the "DVX200 MFT" camera any time they needed a lot better low light capabilities.

 

[NorBro]

lol, you audio guys are crazy.

Use the new technology at your disposable (and what clipping and what is pointless?), and any editor who doesn't know how to use it or change/update their workflow shouldn't be editing audio.

I always heard those stories of the camera and audio departments butting heads...

 

[IronFilm]

Use the new technology at your disposable (and what clipping and what is pointless?), and any editor who doesn't know how to use it or change/update their workflow shouldn't be editing audio.

That could be outside their control (they're not software developers, if a product doesn't support 32bit, they can't go in and change the code!), if their existing optimized workflow doesn't support 32bit.

Why chuck out all of that to use a worse workflow when they're gain no benefit from using 32bit over 24bit? It makes no sense at all. (if there was an actual benefit to 32bit, then maybe it makes sense to push for 32bit during pre-production, as the pain will be worth it vs the benefits. But the benefits simply are not worth it at all for the Sound Dept)

Then when things break in Post, it will be your head on the chopping block as the Sound Mixer who made this foolish decision during post.