Panasonic 4K GH4 possibly coming next Spring...

[Shenan]

...But this is changing, especially with the awards and praise being heaped on the new Olympus OM-D EM-1 camera, which seems to be the first "pro" level Micro 4/3 camera on the market. I keep reading reviews where pro shooters are saying that they are being blown away by their hit-rate when shooting with the EM-1.

If more Micro 4/3 pro lenses like the new Panasonic 42.5mm f/1.2 OIS keep coming ( I expect they will ) and when the new Panasonic/Fuji wide DR sensor tech finally arrives, I can see more pro photo shooters adding the m4/3 format to their regular shooting gear.

Also, I have seen comments to the effect that various current MFT lenses beat equivalent Canon L glass in terms of image quality, and for less money. I hear that most often in regard to the Olympus primes.

Regarding Panasonic making a camera with a larger sensor, I don't see it happening in the current market conditions. IF they released a larger sensor camera it would still be mirrorless, so they would have to develop a completely new lens mount or use Sony's E-mount, which is not at all likely. But, the mirrorless (as well as general camera) market seems to be stagnant right now, so it wouldn't make sense for them to release a new mount and further splinter the market they already have. I can only see that changing under two scenarios: first, if they start losing a LOT of business in the mirrorless camera segment to the likes of Sony with their APS-C and Full Frame mirrorless E-mount cameras (or any other larger sensor mirrorless vendor, like Fuji), and I have not yet seen any solid indication of that happening; second, if the mirrorless market (or in particular the large-sensor mirrorless market) were to grow by leaps and bounds, where it might make sense for them to expand and diversify their offerings.

In short, I wouldn't expect Panasonic to use a new larger sensor and accompanying mount for still/hybrid cameras any time soon.

 

[mcbob]

The Sony F5/55 have a new firmware update that allows it window a 2/3" and or S16mm portion of the sensor. Zack Zamboni is shooting some of the upcoming season of Parts Unknown using vintage S16 lenses on the F5/55. No optic adapter needed. The new Sony's are a workhorse because of this.

I love the idea of that flexibility, excellent for an owner/op working within those budgets, but where along the path of choosing a cinema camera and shooting a crop mode on vintage cinema glass for 1080 delivery would I wonder why I didn't just use a traditional ENG camera/lens?

 

[Bassman2003]

The Sony F5/55 have a new firmware update that allows it window a 2/3" and or S16mm portion of the sensor. Zack Zamboni is shooting some of the upcoming season of Parts Unknown using vintage S16 lenses on the F5/55. No optic adapter needed. The new Sony's are a workhorse because of this.

Thanks for your update. That is great. Now, if we could get that in a lower price point camera it would be great. Maybe it is too much to ask for, but it would be nice.

 

[FrameFarmMedia]

I love the idea of that flexibility, excellent for an owner/op working within those budgets, but where along the path of choosing a cinema camera and shooting a crop mode on vintage cinema glass for 1080 delivery would I wonder why I didn't just use a traditional ENG camera/lens?

The option to give a lot of looks with one camera body is really appealing. I use a C300 for work but if I was an owner op I would go with an F5 in that price bracket.

 

[Bassman2003]

I love the idea of that flexibility, excellent for an owner/op working within those budgets, but where along the path of choosing a cinema camera and shooting a crop mode on vintage cinema glass for 1080 delivery would I wonder why I didn't just use a traditional ENG camera/lens?

I think that point is when you have a few interviews with distracting backgrounds as well as some beauty shots on the same job with a time crunch. Just a lens change for shallow DOF, you only need to bring one camera and your colors remain the same between shots. Might seem like a gray area, but it would allow one to invest in a camera or group of cameras that would cover ALL roles and be matched.

 

[Bassman2003]

The option to give a lot of looks with one camera body is really appealing. I use a C300 for work but if I was an owner op I would go with an F5 in that price bracket.

I just did some Googling and found the LA – FZB2 Sony adapter for this windowed mode on sale at Abel Cine for $16,000. Well, it sounds like a great idea but at that pricepoint it is not very much of a reality!

 

[Uwe Lansing]

I ask myself "do you really need 4K?" When I read what Philip Bloom is writing I´m a bit sceptical:

"
PROS:
Incredibly detailed images, 4 times that of HD but they are not obviously so.
Fantastic ability to crop in post. Something I do on all my interviews for docs now that I shoot 4k for them. I am not shooting 4k docs – just 4k talking heads. I can then go in for tights or back out whenever I want in the edit. Way better.
“Future proof” I am bit hesitant about this as I see very little need for future proofing most of my work. Now for high end drama and big docs then yes. Do it.
You have a higher end format to sell to clients. Sometimes an advantage. Not always though…see cons.
Scaling down to 2K in post often yields quite stunning results.

CONS:
Inefficient codec mean massive files. Even efficient ones are pretty big, which means expensive cards and lots of storage.
Inability to edit natively for the vast majority of people. Proxies are used which of course adds time.
Most production companies I have dealt with cannot take it.
Almost nobody can actually watch 4k. I can’t.
It can lead to lazy cinematography. Although I use the crop to help me in interviews, this is not due to being lazy but to give me options. You should never forget the tight shots because you can crop. The whole aesthetic changes. The depth of field remains the same so it doesn’t look like a true close up
You need to be even more skilled, as mistakes are easier to spot.
Incredibly unforgiving and harsh. Showing the flaws in everything, especially people. Fantastic for beauty shots etc..for drama it’s actually too detailed and causes the DP many issues.
Needs a really big screen to really see the difference.
Will it actually take off as a consumer format for the home? I am very pessimistic about this."

Ok, 120fps and focus peaking would be really nice...

 

[FrameFarmMedia]

This one is $6K http://www.abelcine.com/store/Sony-LA-FZB1-B4-Mount-to-FZ-Mount-Adapter/

If you have over $20K invested in B4 eng lenses $6K isn't a stretch to make them useful if you would use it often. If you wouldn't use it often then it seems like a very simple rental item for those occasions.

 

[Bassman2003]

Yes, noticed that one as well but without the ND filters. If there is no optical conversion why the high price? Seems like the chance of this making it into an AF-200 style camera is almost impossible.

 

[TheDingo]

Also, I have seen comments to the effect that various current MFT lenses beat equivalent Canon L glass in terms of image quality, and for less money. I hear that most often in regard to the Olympus primes.

All of the Olympus primes ( including the new 25mm f/1.8 "standard" lens ) are sharp corner to corner at maximum aperture, something that very few of the FF lenses can match. ( the $4,000 Zeiss 55mm f/1.4 OTIS FF lens can match this )

 

[TheDingo]

Not certain how the "S35 aesthetic" is considered unattainable on m43... just pick a slightly wider lens and open it up an extra stop (easy to do with fast m43 offerings).

+1

 

[FrameFarmMedia]

Yes, noticed that one as well but without the ND filters. If there is no optical conversion why the high price? Seems like the chance of this making it into an AF-200 style camera is almost impossible.

I'd guess its expensive because its a niche product, Sony and once something goes 'Professional' the price goes up. Look at the cost of most broadcast ENG gear. It needs to be a certain standard and priced accordingly. That is not to say it couldn't be done cheaper but they know they are marking to a crowd that has $40K cameras and $20-30K lenses.

 

[Bassman2003]

Yep.

 

[Samuel H]

All of the Olympus primes ( including the new 25mm f/1.8 "standard" lens ) are sharp corner to corner at maximum aperture, something that very few of the FF lenses can match.

All 50mm primes I've tested are sharp corner to corner when set at f/3.5, which gives you the same FoV and DoF of 25mm f/1.8 on m43.
Plus, with most lenses, using them on a bigger sensor gives you sharper images (here).
There's an argument for smaller sensors, but it's not image quality or lens selection (it's because they are cheaper and faster, so they don't have such a need for tricks like line-skipping, etc).

 

[TheDingo]

All 50mm primes I've tested are sharp corner to corner when set at f/3.5, which gives you the same FoV and DoF of 25mm f/1.8 on m43

But you can't expose at f/1.8, so you need 4 times as much light, which could be the difference between 2,000 watts of light and 8,000 watts of light.

Plus, with most lenses, using them on a bigger sensor gives you sharper images (here)

Yes, in absolute terms of sharpness, but in practical terms it makes no difference, which is why some pro still shooters are falling in love with the Olympus OM-D EM-1 camera and starting to use it in place of Full Frame Canons or Nikons for their assignments.

There's an argument for smaller sensors, but it's not image quality or lens selection

I think this is starting to change, and will change a lot more once Micro 4/3 cameras start shipping with wide DR sensors. Affordable m43 cine glass would also change things in a big way, something I expect will happen eventually.

 

[Zephyrnoid]

I hear you but words like "It should be very easy to fix this" aren't the same as the engineers WANT to fix it. The higher contrast profiles cheat the eye into perceiving increased sharpness, which amateurs and those without access to post manipulation need. Since the Marketing dudes usually crack the whips. that's the Panasonic direction I suppose.
Then there's that sensor size conundrum. Have a look at this little snapshot.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v226/zephyrnoid/sensormantra_zps3f68eac0.png
What do you notice? DX (Nikon) is the sensor that most equally matches 16:9 ratio. Super35 requires a crop which means bandwidth is being wasted in 'excess' capture . Finally. Guys! I know about using fast wides and speed boosters to increase bokeh but that's not optimal. Next time you watch some sexy CU's of a lemon wedge being squeezed over steamed lobster on a table, ask yourself. How would this shot look if all the background was only partially blurred?
I realize I make a big deal about this and No it's not the only issue , but we are talking about the difference between 2/3 with virtually infinite DOF and FF with a paper thin slice.
DX 1.5 crop is smack in the middle and you have less stretching to do with legacy lenses + adapters.
Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[TheDingo]

I know about using fast wides and speed boosters to increase bokeh but that's not optimal. Next time you watch some sexy CU's of a lemon wedge being squeezed over steamed lobster on a table, ask yourself. How would this shot look if all the background was only partially blurred?

...But why partially blurred? We are only talking about ONE F-STOP in lens speed between APS-C and Micro 4/3 to achieve equivalent DOF, and there are many high speed Micro 4/3 lenses out now, with many more to come.

 

[combatentropy]

DX (Nikon) is the sensor that most equally matches 16:9 ratio. Super35 requires a crop

Super35 comes in two flavors: 3-perf, which is 24.89 mm × 14 mm and has a 16:9 aspect ratio, and 4-perf, which is 24.89 mm × 18.66 mm and has a 4:3 aspect ratio.

When people here think S35, they're most likely thinking 3-perf, since the Arri Alexa, Canon C300, Red Mysterium, etc., are that size.

 

[Zephyrnoid]

...But why partially blurred? We are only talking about ONE F-STOP in lens speed between APS-C and Micro 4/3 to achieve equivalent DOF, and there are many high speed Micro 4/3 lenses out now, with many more to come.

Let's see some side by sides with comparable lenses/cameras/ apertures at say 12", 6', 15' lens to subject distances .

 

[Barry_Green]

I don't have a 7D or S35 sensor on hand so I can't show you the shots, but I can tell you the math and use a DOF calculator and it's not hard to verify.

S35 (7D) sensor, with a 35mm lens, at f/4, and 10 feet to the subject, has a total DOF of 3.87 feet.
To match the field of view, you'd use a 25mm lens on the M43 camera. An m43 camera with a 25mm lens, at f/2.8, and 10 feet to the subject, has a total DOF of 4.28 feet. Nearly identical. If you want them absolutely identical, you'd have to open up to f/2.6.

The identicality doesn't change with distance. If you want to measure DOF at 12", using the same 35mm and 25mm lenses, the DOF for a 7D at 12" target distance at f/4 is .03 feet. For the M43, the DOF at 12" with a 25mm lens at f/2.8 is .04 feet. Again, going to f/2.6 would get you to the identical same DOF, 0.3 feet.

So -- as said before, the only magic you need to get the identical same field of view and the identical same DOF as a S35 sensor, is to open your iris by (a tiny tick more than) one f-stop.