Panasonic 4K GH4 possibly coming next Spring...

I think the bottom line is, while the GH4 is perfect for some...others would welcome an AF200. It's not a knock on the GH4 to say something updated in the AF100 body style would be sweet! lol

ZCam final.jpg
 
thats pretty good, except it needs higher 1080 overcrank and some level of 4k overcrank
also pretty sure they could squeeze a 5" OLED monitor in there VS a 4"

but umm, yeah, I'd buy one of those!
 
Just curious, and this isn't meant to start a flame war or anything...

Are there any GH3 users who are NOT planning to get a GH4? I put myself in that camp, and my reasoning is 2-fold:

1. For me (read that again, for me) the GH3 meets all of my needs right now (except the 120 1080p fps).

2. 4k is an enormous jump in tech, and makes me feel like the GH4 may be a great camera for Panasonic to beta test, with a future GH5 in 18 months likely being a much improved camera (with a much more refined and functional expansion module).

Comments or thoughts?
 
alaskacameradude said:
Furthermore, I said all other things being equal. So lets test FS700 Raw vs BM raw.
Have you done that? I certainly do not see a 'major advantage' to BM line, in fact I
would give the slight edge to the Sony in that test.
Click to expand...
RAW no RAW BM also gives you ability to shoot internally ProRes as well in the price of the camera. What do you get with FS-700? AVCHD at 1080. In order for you to actually shoot RAW with FS-700, you have to buy an external recorder (min $2300, add media and license to record), so for most people it will exceed 10K! With BM camera at 2K (of course double that for everything else) the question is: is FS-700 twice as good of a camera as BMCC?
The other issue is the color reproduction on BM cameras, which is far superior to anything in the price range. I am sorry, but FS-700 makes everything look like plastic. IQ out of 700 is simply inferior to the one produced by BMCC. The fact that BM cameras are used frequently as B-cameras in conjunction with Alexa is just proof of that. I am sorry, but I don't see any inferiority or disadvantage to MFT sensor used in BMDCC.
 
snowblindfilm said:
RAW no RAW BM also gives you ability to shoot internally ProRes as well in the price of the camera. What do you get with FS-700? AVCHD at 1080. In order for you to actually shoot RAW with FS-700, you have to buy an external recorder (min $2300, add media and license to record), so for most people it will exceed 10K! With BM camera at 2K (of course double that for everything else) the question is: is FS-700 twice as good of a camera as BMCC?
The other issue is the color reproduction on BM cameras, which is far superior to anything in the price range. I am sorry, but FS-700 makes everything look like plastic. IQ out of 700 is simply inferior to the one produced by BMCC. The fact that BM cameras are used frequently as B-cameras in conjunction with Alexa is just proof of that. I am sorry, but I don't see any inferiority or disadvantage to MFT sensor used in BMDCC.
Click to expand...

Well yeah, the BM has an advantage of being able to shoot ProRes internally, no doubt. For the FS700 you have to
get the 7Q to do that.....and yeah, it is a lot more $$$. I'm lucky in that I got the FS700 as a B-Stock for about $6,400
so I will be able to squeeze in under that 10k amount.

As for the color reproduction everyone has their own opinion. I certainly disagree that 'the FS700 makes everything look like
plastic.' I think it looks quite nice, and my friend who sold his BMCC disagrees that 'the IQ out of the 700 is simply
inferior to the one produced by BMCC'. Kind of reminds me of the big Zacuto shoot out. A lot of people loved the GH3
look. Me, I thought IT looked 'like plastic'.

But, my point was NOT to start a 'camera contest.' My point was that the MFT sensor may be seen
as 'starting with a handicap' (not that it can't look good!) I think the pure physics of the thing means
that if a BMD MFT sensor was made, the same sensor with the same number of pixels (only made to
a larger scale ie..S35 sized) would have even better DR than the MFT version. Again, maybe you feel
I'm wrong.
 
Just curious, and this isn't meant to start a flame war or anything...

Are there any GH3 users who are NOT planning to get a GH4? I put myself in that camp, and my reasoning is 2-fold:

1. For me (read that again, for me) the GH3 meets all of my needs right now (except the 120 1080p fps).

2. 4k is an enormous jump in tech, and makes me feel like the GH4 may be a great camera for Panasonic to beta test, with a future GH5 in 18 months likely being a much improved camera (with a much more refined and functional expansion module).

Comments or thoughts?
Click to expand...

When I get my GH4 my GH3 will be my back-up camera. I've owned the GH1, GH2 and GH3. Now is time for the GH4. My cameras make me money and I want the latest technology. And for the price the GH4 is going to be a fantastic camera that will may the investment back many times over.
 
Re the FS700 vs BM debate the fs700 has much better rolling shutter. Bmcc is similar to the 5d mkii in that regard. For most purposes that make the FS a winner for me.
 
I think I will end up liking the original BMCC over the BM4K, because I usually prefer DR over sharpness, and I think the original BMCC already has great resolution, but yes, we'll soon see...
 
alaskacameradude said:
Cinema cameras don't have internal ND's or professional built-in audio? Are we talking about the past? Because tons of them
certainly do now! AF100, FS700, C100, C300, F3, F5, F55 and F65. The Alexa XT series has internal ND's as well
(although it is different.) I think the real reason DSLR's didn't have these things had more to do with the fact that they
were STILL cameras that just happened to shoot video, and less to do with the fact that they were 'proper cinema cameras'.
I'm not talking about ENG cameras at all, I actually think cinema cameras should have built in NDs and professional built in
audio. And so do many of the companies that make cinema cameras these days, because plenty of them are making cinema
cameras with these options.
Click to expand...

I actually agree with what you said that the main factor in DSLRs not getting built-in NDs is probably just the physical space limitations of the DSLR bodies.

However, what I said before still stands as well. Aside from the F65 and the Alexa XT, I would say all the others are not cinema cameras, insofar as movie productions with a decent budget wouldn't use them. The others are all-around cameras not specifically targeted at movie production like the Alexa, Red, and F65 are. And the traditional and current movie production workflow is to use ND filters in a matte box, as well as double-system sound.

The inexpensive, large-sensor, interchangeable lens real video camera segment is a very recent development that started with the AF100 and FS100 and was spurred by the success of DSLR video. This video camera segment is only barely over 3 years old (AF100 release). The manufacturers are still trying to figure out what we really want, and they're big, slow moving companies, which is why smaller ones like Blackmagic Design and Digital Bolex are able to respond more quickly to the shifting requests. Just look at the several failures that Sony has already had in this camp for examples (VG10, VG20, VG900) that illustrate how hard it is for them to figure out what we want, and reasons for the large companies to be conservative in their approach.

Think about just how lopsided of a combination of features it is to ask for raw video AND built-in NDs / XLRs on the same camera, for example, at least from a manufacturer's perspective. Give them time and they will eventually get everyone's requests in. Except that by then, new desired features will have come along.
 
Last edited:
The bottom line is we will have much better 4K choices in 2014 than in 2013 so if you have been shooting with the GH cameras and have m4/3rd glass the GH4 is a no brainer and if you have Canon EF glass the BM 4K is a no brainer.
 
They do which is why I will always keep one in the quiver. However I think I am going with the GH4 over the BM4K, I am interested in the overcrank and the hopefully superior audio capabilities.
 
For me it's a no brainer, I've despised the bmcc form factor, However I do admit when in the right hands it's image is gorgeous. I'm still digging the dslr small size.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top