Panasonic 4K GH4 possibly coming next Spring...
- Thread starter Nicholas Natteau
- Start date
slidemaster
Well-known member
After watching the 4K video posted on a 2K monitor I have to say I am blown away. To deliver that level of quality in a camera body of $2000 is amazing. I love the Canon Cinema series of camera's, this will be added to that. I love that they took the time to come up with a attachment to out the 4:2:2 in 10 bit. If you cannot tell a story with this thing ....ahhh you get it.
cpc
Well-known member
Downsampling N-bit 4:2:0 4K images to 2K will give full 4:4:4 color (no subsampling) with N+2 bit luma resolution, and N-bit chroma resolution.
Downsampling N-bit 4:2:2 4K images to 2K will give full 4:4:4 color (no subsampling) with N+2 bit luma resolution, and N+1 bit chroma resolution.
So technically, downsampling a 4K 10-bit 4:2:2 image to 2K can produce 12-bit (i.e. digital cinema) color resolution, at least in the luma channel.
azonicbruce
Active member
Can someone point me where they are getting this $2000 figure at? The only thing I've seen published is 1999 euro, but that comes out to around $2700 US.
Thanks, cpc!
This filmmaker magazine preview has a couple of interesting photos in it: one shows that the piece that sticks up from the base and connects to the HDMI on the camera can be moved out of the way, and the other has a close-up of the curious holes in the front of the base, and suggests(?) that they're 1/4-20 holes.
This filmmaker magazine preview has a couple of interesting photos in it: one shows that the piece that sticks up from the base and connects to the HDMI on the camera can be moved out of the way, and the other has a close-up of the curious holes in the front of the base, and suggests(?) that they're 1/4-20 holes.
slidemaster
Well-known member
I saw that number on the "No film school" blog and I think he was taking it from the 4/3rds message board.
Samuel H
Major Contributor
electronic equipment uses a completely different exchange rate, due to taxes and warranty obligations being much higher here in Europe (and reseller competition, lower)
currently the GH3 is 1025eur at amazon.es but $860 at amazon.com
When the first mock-up of the GH4 was released earlier this year, people were writing that it was going to sell for under $2,000. That's where I first heard that figure, anyway.
What devices, please?
Dafilman21
Carbonite Member
Rumored price from Sweden http://www.43rumors.com/
Thomas Smet
Veteran
Any form of pre-amp or device such as beachtech or Juicedlink. Those devices take XLR audio and pass it through to the 3.5mm plug. Now the adapter for the GH4 may pass the audio through to the GH4 in a much better way but we still don't know what the pre-amp or AGC is like in the camera itself. Even though the adapter may provide a digital connection to the camera it is typically the way the camera itself records the audio that some find not as desirable.
I can't wait to learn more about how the camera itself handles the recording of the audio.
Mark Williams
Veteran
Since the camera does not shoot 4:2:2 internal is this the way to get the best image quality for a 1080p project without resorting to an external recorder? Could you do this with Handbrake or is there better down sampling software?
Last edited:
Thomas Smet
Veteran
Adobe Media Encoder should do a really good job at batching your entire list of shots. Adobe Media encoder also has the advantage up smoothing out the chroma as well. So it will convert the 4:2:0 4k to a sort of interpolated 4:4:4 4k. Then you can create a preset for each clip that down scales to 1080p and saves to ProRes 4444.
Apple Compressor is another great option. It is only $50.00 and has controls for the quality of the down conversion. It can batch convert your entire list of shots and you can create a preset that all the clips will use that exports as 1080p ProRes 4444. Compressor will however only be able to import video shot in the mov format from the GH4. I'm sure that will not be a problem however since that is likely to be the best quality format.
Eric Coughlin
Veteran
If shooting internally at 4K 100 mbits/s and down-scaling to 1080p gives you the best 1080p, then why would anyone use the 200 mbit/s 1080p internal codec?
So that your computer doesn't have to spend all night converting footage, and you can get to work editing right away. Not to mention the storage.
joe 1008
Veteran
For the ease of postproduction. The 200 mbit/s codec stores each single frame while the 4K100 codec is la long GOP format that only stores the difference between frames. Decoding such 4K footage will require a hell of a computer and so does downscaling the footage to 1080p 4:4:4. Also have in mind that the 200 mbit/s can store up to 96 fps while the 4K codec only goes up to 30 fps. So 96 fps in 1080p is roughly the same data as 24 fps in 4K. Having in mind that the long GOP in 1080p, which is also able to store up to 96 fps, also goes up to 100 mbit/s the numbers start to fit, don't they?
gkantziper
Esteemed Member
I'd be curious to hear from others on the forum about this idea: The GH4 is potentially 3 stops faster @ 0 db gain than an AF100 which is rated 400 ISO @ 0 db gain.
I'm GUESSING this based on this information:
An AF100 can be gained up to 18 db / 3200 ISO and the GH4 can be gained up to 25,600. So, if 25,600 is 18 db on a GH-4???
Panasonic states, "GH4 enables shooting at maximum ISO 25,600. Sensitivity, gradation performance, resolution and color reproduction are dramatically improved to achieve even higher picture quality."
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it follows the GH4 is 3200 ISO at 0 db gain. That'd be nice but it isn't likely true!
I'm GUESSING this based on this information:
An AF100 can be gained up to 18 db / 3200 ISO and the GH4 can be gained up to 25,600. So, if 25,600 is 18 db on a GH-4???
Panasonic states, "GH4 enables shooting at maximum ISO 25,600. Sensitivity, gradation performance, resolution and color reproduction are dramatically improved to achieve even higher picture quality."
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it follows the GH4 is 3200 ISO at 0 db gain. That'd be nice but it isn't likely true!