New Panasonic MFT cine camera?

combatentropy said:
And focal distance. If you focus the lens on something far away, the depth of field is deeper than if you focus on something up close. That's why the old cinematography depth-of-field charts included focal distance (example).

For example, if you focus on something 6' away, your DOF might be 3'. But if you focus on something 16' away, your DOF might be 10'.

Each lens has a certain focal distance where DOF is at its maximum. Some people might think it is when you set the lens to infinity, but actually it is a little bit less than infinity, and it is called the hyperfocal distance.
Click to expand...

sure but that isn't really dependent on the specific lens design beyond focal length and aperture. so - while you might need to look it up in a chart - labeling the lens's DOF in some way would just mean you don't have to look it up. focusing farther away yielding more DOF is also independent of optic
 
morgan_moore said:
MItch - the poor performance of this lens is due to its age and SD ness or due to some form of compensation for three chips?

Maybe a properly designed doubler would be 'cheap'

ENG lens on FS7 with glassless converter..

Click to expand...

Poor performance could be due to a number of factors. First off that model was a fairly cheap industrial lens, not a high end performer. It was designed for SD, and HD intended lenses are of far greater quality. In fact I'm not sure that particular SD lens was even designed for 16x9 coverage. If it is an old 4x3 lens then that would help explain the vignette on the wide end as well as the overall low performance.
 
morgan_moore said:
THis looks good - at 1lb five elements and designed for the job it should be better than the internal dubler.

ONe thing Im not up to speed on is the 2/3 lenses are (or are not??) landing the coloured light at different planes to function with three chips. (This would cause colour fringing on a single chip - my 'film' was abound with colour fringes amongst many abberations)

Maybe Mitch would be kind enough to chip in.
Click to expand...

Due to the physics of a prism and mechanical manufacturing needs, B4 mount 2/3" lenses are not deigned to focus different parts of the spectrum on the same focal plane. While the differences are measured in microns, it's certainly enough to cause excessive color fringing and chromatic aberration if not compensated for with proper optics. The IB/E optical adapters account for this and compensate for the differences in the spectrum focal distances. I can't speak for other optical adapters as I dont have detailed personal knowledge, but I can tell you that using a lens with just the internal doubler will not be properly collimated due to this issue.
 
On the question of what magic happens to depth of field with the use of these optical adapter, the answer is simple. The original B4 mount zoom is unchanged so the relative depth of field it wold render when used in its native 2/3" is the same as when adapted and used in S-35. Physics.
 
Mitch Gross said:
This looks like a Chinese copy of an IB/E HDx2.
Click to expand...

I'm curious to see if it is a simple 2x teleconverter or if it does account for the differing focusing points for each color and the super thick glass of the prism block.

Because it's not just the differing focus points that need to be accommodated for when adapting B4 lens, the light is also focused through a whopping 46.2mm of glass (prism and filters) before it hits the sensor: https://tech.ebu.ch/docs/tech/tech3294.pdf . If you don't correct for that you get massive spherical aberration. You can see a good example of what that looks like here: https://cinematography.com/index.php?/topic/85041-digiprime-adapter-bloom-mystery/ .

Metabones, for instance, has different Speed Boosters for only a 1.6mm cover glass thickness difference, so 46.2mm is massive. (Panasonic has 4mm thick cover glass, while a lot of Blackmagic cameras have a 2.4mm cover glass thickness).

I own the IB/E HDx2 Mark II and it is lovely.

I did want to point out, though, that the HDx2 Mark II is 5 elements in 2 groups, with 7 total glass surfaces. It's also designed to be used on PL mount cameras, so the lenses are not going as close to a m4/3 sensor as they could be.

This lens goes all the way to the rear of the m4/3 mount and is 8 elements in 5 groups, with 12 total glass surfaces. It may very well be better than the HDx2.

This does not look a copy of anything. If they wanted to copy something, it would most likely be the 2x teleconverters that Olympus and Panasonic already make. Their optical formula (https://www.newsshooter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Screen-Shot-2020-09-29-at-10.01.54.png) doesn't match those of Olympus and Panasonic: https://www.four-thirds.org/en/microft/accessories.html .

I also don't think one should go straight to using the term Chinese copy. There are some very unique lenses coming from a variety of manufacturers based in China. I just today got in a Meike 28mm f2.8 lens and it is absolutely lovely - no plastic at all (even the lens cap is metal) with clickless aperture and it seems very sharp so far with nice bokeh and very little vignetting on m4/3. And the kicker - it was only $50. I could have spent over half of that on just a step up ring. If I had paid $150 for that lens I would have felt that I got a good deal. I specifically needed a super small front element lens for combining with an anamorphic adapter and this fit the bill better than anything else out there.
 
Last edited:
I'm using a larger Isco projector attachment with a one-off variable diopter. I'll post a write up at some point, because a lot of what I have is not documented anywhere, but I'm not quite ready yet.
 
hmmmm... less than inspiring. Hope the info is wrong. https://www.43rumors.com/leaked-specs-of-the-new-panasonic-cine-bgh1-mft-camera/

The main specifications of Panasonic’s cinema 4K box camera “LUMIX BGH1“
10.28 million effective pixels Four Thirds sensor
Micro Four Thirds mount
C4K60P 4: 2: 2 10-bit RAW video (HDMI output)
C4K60P 4: 2: 0 10-bit (H.265 / HEVC) Internal recording
dual native ISO
Double SD card slot
Wi-Fi / Bluetooth
11800mAh VBR battery compatible
size 93.0×93.0x78.0mm
weight 545g (main unit only)

No 10bit 4:2:2 internal? No ND? No 4K120? No so much more?
 
I think there is a typo somewhere in that chain. It doesn't make sense to have 8-bit 4:2:0 HEVC. Technically, it's possible but it's been capable of 10-bit since 2012.
 
ahalpert said:
It's probably 420 in 60 and 10bit 422 in 24/30?
Click to expand...

Maybe even in higher frame rates.

In any case, given that some of the specs have leaked, the official reveal shouldn't be far away. The GH line appears to have moved downstream, so this should be Panasonic's big salvo in the MFT niche.
 
Harry Pallenberg said:
The main specifications of Panasonic’s cinema 4K box camera “LUMIX BGH1“
10.28 million effective pixels Four Thirds sensor
Micro Four Thirds mount
C4K60P 4: 2: 2 10-bit RAW video (HDMI output)
C4K60P 4: 2: 0 10-bit (H.265 / HEVC) Internal recording
dual native ISO
Double SD card slot
Wi-Fi / Bluetooth
11800mAh VBR battery compatible
size 93.0×93.0x78.0mm
weight 545g (main unit only)
Click to expand...
From the physical dimensions it seems to be very similar to the form factor of the Z Cam E2, or actually about a half inch less in depth and 200g (7 oz.) lighter than that camera. So it's a camera that is not too much larger than the lens mount.

By way of comparison, the 11800mAh VBR battery mentioned weighs 441g and is 90mm tall (almost as tall as the camera itself). But that style battery (same as used in the EVA1, DVX200, and other larger camcorders) has a fairly large attachment area on the camera. On the Z Cam E2 which uses similarly sized batteries, most of the back of the camera is the battery plate.

So I guess it's like a small form factor GH5S, although it's a bit odd that there's no 4K 120fps since that sensor is clearly capable of full pixel readout at 120fps (as seen on the Z Cam E2). Perhaps it will have integrated live streaming and improved remote camera control features so that it could be used as a live output camera (to accommodate current trends) in addition to more traditional cinema applications.

I'm reminded of this article evaluating the Z Cam E2 as an alternative to the GH5S for usage in in-car camera systems on shows like Top Gear and The Grand Tour. I suppose it is a pretty good form factor for those types of applications:
https://definitionmagazine.com/reviews/review-z-cam-e2-camera

It does seem strange that this camera would be coming out 2.5 years after the GH5S with largely similar internal recording specs though.
 
It looks like the same sensor as Z Cam E2 - M4 as well but Z Cam doesn't just have 10-bit 4:2:2 ProRes (Standard and LT) but 10-bit HEVC/H265 at up to 60 fps (they may be pixel binning at 120). And it's priced at $1,499.

It also claims 16 stops and has been shipping since June. If the leaked Panasonic specs are in the ballpark, this model may be a tad late to the party. And the GH owners can cry if they want to.
 
DLD said:
It looks like the same sensor as Z Cam E2 - M4 as well but Z Cam doesn't just have 10-bit 4:2:2 ProRes (Standard and LT) but 10-bit HEVC/H265 at up to 60 fps (they may be pixel binning at 120). And it's priced at $1,499.
It also claims 16 stops and has been shipping since June. If the leaked Panasonic specs are in the ballpark, this model may be a tad late to the party. And the GH owners can cry if they want to.
Click to expand...
Since it's only a 10-megapixel sensor, there is no oversampling or pixel binning when doing a 4K (8-megapixel) 17:9 or 16:9 readout. The additional 2-megapixels are only used when doing a 4:3 readout (for additional vertical area) for anamorphic shooting.

The sensor does drop to a 10-bit readout in 4K 120fps rather than the 12-bit readout that is possible at lower frame rates.

Here is the sensor datasheet: https://www.sony-semicon.co.jp/products/common/pdf/IMX299CJK_Flyer.pdf

From what I understand, the 16-stop high dynamic range feature on the Z Cam E2 is kind of a gimmick as it captures with two different exposure intervals, which can result in some strange visual artifacts. Real world dynamic range in the standard capture modes is pretty much the same as the GH5S as you might expect, given that they share the same sensor: https://www.cined.com/z-cam-e2-cinema-camera-in-the-wild-a-hands-on-review
 
davedv said:
Since it's only a 10-megapixel sensor, there is no oversampling or pixel binning when doing a 4K (8-megapixel) 17:9 or 16:9 readout. The additional 2-megapixels are only used when doing a 4:3 readout (for additional vertical area) for anamorphic shooting...
Click to expand...

I meant that Z Cam is pixel binning to get 120 fps at the same bit rate (230 Mbps) as the 60 fps.

And the sensor itself looks to be 41 MPX capable with Quad Bayer (sorry, Quad Buyer) turned on. Which could have made GH-6 a quality stills camera. And kept Olympus in the game a while longer.

Ah, well. Big boys don't cry, yi-yi-yi.
 
Or Z Cam could compress more for 120 fps. Overall, it probably comes out half a dozen anyway.

R5 does both and the results look kind of the same.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top