Panasonic 4k camera system info & updates

^^ I'm impressed. But I'm curious if that was recorded with the internal codec or an external recorder.
 
gh4-venusengine-panasonic_zps10b31826.jpg


This is the ASIC that lets it do instantly, fanlessly, what takes a desktop computer much longer: debayer, tune picture, reduce noise, and compress.

I used to wonder why in every camera brochure they stopped in the middle of listing the features to show a close-up of a circuit board. I was always like, "Just do whatever it is you got to do . . . ."

I'm come to appreciate it more, especially when rumors abound of an upcoming cam's features. People say, "It can't possibly do that without sucking battery juice and needing 10 fans." They think about what their home computer can do and assume a little camera is only weaker. But that's the whole trick with a special-purpose processor.

Anyway, these little chips cost a fortune to develop, and I guess the engineers are so proud of it that they have to have to show a picture of it.
 
Marino215 said:
It seems like they crippled the GH4 on purpose. I think what's going on is they improved the GH3 tremendously, what they're not showing (what we all want) won't be announced till NAB. IMHO the stage is set for a mid range camera above the GH4 and below the Vari cam. Looks like we're gonna see a successor to the AF101. ND filters, 200 MBps, real cine gammas, maybe even 2k RAW or something crazy. It will go after the fs700s jugular, (quality) high frame rates and all. There's nothing to touch the fs700, especially with the F5 still relatively new. I believe the midrange camera will be a perfect chance for Panasonic to gain some more market share. It's a no brainer. I own an fs700, love it, but if I can have a smaller foot print, robust image, variable frame rates with out adding any expense for an external recorder I'm in! I can't see it being priced more than the fs700, it would certainly take some business from Sony. Just my guess, I'm probably more confused than you and that little scenario was the best I can come up with. I'm sure it will be a nice camera but right now RGB 444 12-bit excites me more than a lower bit 4k. Idk, I could be wrong, and you can get RGB 444 1080p out of a 10 bit 422 4k signal but I think the next go around should get real interesting. Just my 2 cents
Thanks
Click to expand...


It wont take any of the fs700's thunder unless it has a s35 sensor like the fs700 does.
 
roxics said:
^^ I'm impressed. But I'm curious if that was recorded with the internal codec or an external recorder.
Click to expand...

If you go to 43rumours.com, they have multiple videos. It seems that this was recorded internally. I didn't see the docking thingamajig in the interview video.
 
atarijedi said:
If you go to 43rumours.com, they have multiple videos. It seems that this was recorded internally. I didn't see the docking thingamajig in the interview video.
Click to expand...

I would bet its internal, I'm not so sure we're seeing the same 8 bit as we did just a year ago. Something's going on, better processing, codec idk. The origional aerial footage I saw earlier looks fantastic, beautiful colors.
 
Marino215 said:
...ND filters, 200 MBps, real cine gammas, maybe even 2k RAW or something crazy... [CUT]... I'm sure it will be a nice camera but right now RGB 444 12-bit excites me more than a lower bit 4k. Idk, I could be wrong, and you can get RGB 444 1080p out of a 10 bit 422 4k signal but I think the next go around should get real interesting. Just my 2 cents
Thanks
Click to expand...

I doubt we'll ever see Panasonic release a Raw camera. With their AVC-Ultra codecs and focus on broadcast, I don't see them doing that at any price point, let alone sub-$10k. And I don't think you'll ever see 444 12-bit in a sub $10k camera, not when they have the Varicam at a higher price point. The overwhelming majority of folks at this price point would never need it, so it would only undercut Varicam sales.
 
AAARGH! WHY oh WHY don't camera manufacturers understand the importance of ergonomics? Adding a pro audio and output module to a DSLR? Great idea, we've all been shouting for something like this for a long time. So why forget to add internal power to it? This is so infuriating, I just don't understand why they don't talk to the people who actually use these cameras for video. Look Panny, it's really simple: Adding a pro video module is great, adding one that is neither practical for use without rigging v-lock batteries nor small enough for run and gun is totally pointless. If you're going to make a video module, then go the whole hog and do it right - make it big enough to include batteries, audio, outputs, physical switches, maybe a larger monitor with peaking etc, perhaps even a *gulp* handle so we can, you know, actually hold the thing? If you're going to turn a DSLR into a video camera then ACTUALLY do that, don't go half way and lose your nerve. It makes me SO mad - they know what we need and they just can't see the blindingly obvious solution.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top