4K Panasonic GH4 May Arrive This Spring to Compete Against Canon Cinema Cameras - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 2Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 798 Old 10-23-2013, 01:42 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
jogiba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,032
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 113 Post(s)
Liked: 75
Looks like 2014 will bring many 4K cameras.
Quote:
16mp
1/8000 shutter
1mil dot OLED screen
21mm OLED viewfinder, 3,000+ dot.
Time code
200mbps mp4 All-i/100mbps IPB
4k/30p
4:2:2 10/8bit output
3G-SDI and XLR adaptor (An adaptor that the camera sits on with XLR x2, HD-SDI x4)
Price: €2799
http://nofilmschool.com/2013/10/panasonic-gh4-4k-30fps-price-cost-rumor-canon-cinema/
jogiba is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 798 Old 10-23-2013, 02:08 PM
Advanced Member
 
hatchback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: NJ
Posts: 597
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 42 Post(s)
Liked: 57
Finally something new from Panasonic that I might want to buy!
hatchback is online now  
post #3 of 798 Old 10-23-2013, 02:39 PM
AVS Special Member
 
brunerww's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,027
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 31
I would probably sell my GH1, GH2 and GH3 to buy one of these at the $3K price point, but it's a bit of a disappointment that the list doesn't include RAW frown.gif

That said, Canon should be worried. Between this and the Blackmagic cameras, there won't be any reason to shell out $17,000 for a C300.
brunerww is online now  
post #4 of 798 Old 10-23-2013, 02:47 PM
AVS Special Member
 
slimoli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: South Florida
Posts: 4,685
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked: 31
Not sure if we can trust this..Panasonic has never used the number "4" on their products, to start with. It brings bad luck in Japanese culture. The price difference between current and new model is also too high, most likely we will see a GH5 a little more expensive than the GH3 with possible 4K capability.

Standard Definition Causes Lung Cancer, Heart Disease, Emphysema, And May Complicate Pregnancy
slimoli is offline  
post #5 of 798 Old 10-23-2013, 04:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Paulo Teixeira's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,728
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked: 33
A lot of people said the same about Sony not naming the new Playstation with 4 at the end. I believe we will still see a successor to the GH3 with a price tag not too different.

10 bit and 3G HDI output would have to be for a higher class camera. I would hope it includes ND filters built in. 2160 60p is another thing I'd like to see. I also hope this thing gets hackable or at least provide even higher bit rate although if the codec is H.265, that would be fine as is. If it does get 2160 60p then it better have HDMI 2.0. 6G-SDI would be good as well.

Anyway, Panasonic did have a patent in the past for a handheld M43 camera sort of like the Sony VG30 but smaller.
Paulo Teixeira is offline  
post #6 of 798 Old 10-25-2013, 10:40 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 3,032
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 118 Post(s)
Liked: 100
I'm going to find it very hard to invest in anything "4K"! I read a review of a Samsung 4K TV on CNET this morning:

"Anyone buying a 4K/Ultra High-Definition TV of 65 inches or smaller and expecting to see an improvement in detail -- or any other aspect of picture quality -- with normal HD sources will be disappointed. We tested the Samsung UNF9000 and Panasonic TC-P65WT600 extensively to look for any such improvement compared with a same-size 1080p TV, and it simply wasn't there.

Meanwhile actual 4K content is as rare as hen's teeth today, and not going mainstream, especially as broadcast TV, for years. Even when a 4K TV plays 4K content, the improvement over a 1080p TV is likely to range from subtle to nonexistent, depending on how close you sit. As difficult as it is to believe when you hear about all those extra pixels mentioned in marketing materials, 4K offers at best marginal real-world improvements on 1080p."

I don't live where I can use more than about 55 inche TVs.
bsprague is offline  
post #7 of 798 Old 10-25-2013, 10:43 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 3,032
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 118 Post(s)
Liked: 100
" there won't be any reason to shell out $17,000 for a C300."

That's a camera with some "curb appeal". It just looks right.
bsprague is offline  
post #8 of 798 Old 10-25-2013, 05:08 PM
AVS Special Member
 
brunerww's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,027
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 31
I'll just buy a GH4 and use the other $14K to buy something with real curb appeal: http://uncrate.com/stuff/ducati-monster-diesel-motorcycle/ smile.gif
brunerww is online now  
post #9 of 798 Old 10-25-2013, 11:07 PM
Senior Member
 
SD90's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 368
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 18
I can't get too excited about a GH4 when the GH3 doesn't even produce video that is as bright, detailed and colorful as a low bitrate (20 mbps) Olympus E-P5: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIAAIClmA6s
SD90 is offline  
post #10 of 798 Old 10-26-2013, 12:36 AM
AVS Special Member
 
slimoli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: South Florida
Posts: 4,685
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by SD90 View Post

I can't get too excited about a GH4 when the GH3 doesn't even produce video that is as bright, detailed and colorful as a low bitrate (20 mbps) Olympus E-P5: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIAAIClmA6s

I disagree. The GH3 produces a better quality video, IMHO.

Standard Definition Causes Lung Cancer, Heart Disease, Emphysema, And May Complicate Pregnancy
slimoli is offline  
post #11 of 798 Old 10-26-2013, 01:43 AM
AVS Special Member
 
flintyplus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: yeovil somerset
Posts: 1,296
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 55 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by SD90 View Post

I can't get too excited about a GH4 when the GH3 doesn't even produce video that is as bright, detailed and colorful as a low bitrate (20 mbps) Olympus E-P5: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIAAIClmA6s
True for me the Olympus looked best in most well lit scenes,not in low light though.
flintyplus is offline  
post #12 of 798 Old 10-26-2013, 04:51 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,657
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1428 Post(s)
Liked: 1541
Here's the summation of the video quality from the Olympus according to dpreview:

''Disappointingly, the E-P5's video is no better than the E-M5's: although nominally 1920 x 1080 resolution, it looks a lot lower, possibly as a result of clumsy sharpening. Shooting a video resolution chart, we can't get it to produce the roughly 1000 lines per picture height that it should be able to produce. The result on real-world footage is that everything looks rather mushy and indistinct.''

I think anyone that's played or owned a GH3 would not describe their footage in that manner. That's why the GH3 has the reputation it does. However I find it really odd that so many of the GH3 shots in that comparison looked so soft. I only recently tested a GH3 and I can't recall any clip that I ever shot that looked as soft as most of the GH3 clips looked in that shootout. Pretty bizarre, especially when you look at how many clips are on YouTube that are razor sharp

I'm surprised that Blunty used vivid mode in that comparison and I think that's why the A/B has such limited value IMO. Every manufacturer's vivid mode is going to be quite different. Some are downright ugly. Standard mode at default settings should have been used.

Here's dpreview's comments on the Olympus autofocus:

''The camera can continuously autofocus during movie shooting (from movie mode) but, being based on contrast-detection AF, the result is footage that shimmers and 'breathes' as the camera constantly overshoots and undershoots to confirm that it's still in focus.''
Ken Ross is offline  
post #13 of 798 Old 10-26-2013, 10:19 AM
Senior Member
 
SD90's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 368
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 18
The Olympus bodies even produce landscape video that looks clearer on Youtube than the full frame, 36 megapixel $3,000 Nikon D800E: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=krq5r2Zhlzc
SD90 is offline  
post #14 of 798 Old 10-26-2013, 07:25 PM
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by flintyplus View Post

True for me the Olympus looked best in most well lit scenes,not in low light though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SD90 View Post

I can't get too excited about a GH4 when the GH3 doesn't even produce video that is as bright, detailed and colorful as a low bitrate (20 mbps) Olympus E-P5: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIAAIClmA6s

Im sorry, but where is it superior to the GH3?

That comparison shows that the GH3 has a little better dynamic range and has a better resolution. There is more detail in the video of the GH3.

Where is the Olympus better? Cant see that.
thedest is offline  
post #15 of 798 Old 10-27-2013, 12:27 AM
Senior Member
 
SD90's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 368
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedest View Post

the GH3 has a little better dynamic range and has a better resolution. There is more detail in the video of the GH3.
Where is the Olympus better? Cant see that.

Screen shots of the 1080 footage of both cameras:
http://imageshack.com/a/img801/5968/sh3i.png
http://imageshack.com/a/img38/291/a8b4.png
http://imageshack.com/a/img59/3130/sxnv.png
http://imageshack.com/a/img707/590/0fti.png
SD90 is offline  
post #16 of 798 Old 10-27-2013, 06:36 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
jogiba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,032
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 113 Post(s)
Liked: 75
View the Original .MP4 file (1920x1080 / 686MB) that is available on Vimeo.



https://vimeo.com/49420579

titoheron likes this.
jogiba is online now  
post #17 of 798 Old 10-27-2013, 07:16 AM
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
SD90, your examples only show that the GH3 is softer, and that means nothing.

I always say that. Too much contrast, too much saturation and oversharpening are great ways to fool the consumer.

Check that out:


.
Check out how the 2 cameras render that rock. The transition between the highlight area and the midtone area is pretty bad in the olympus. You can also see oversharpening. Look how fine the detail of the GH3 is. It has much more detail - thats the result of a better resolution. If you like sharp images, you can increase the sharpening in the GH3. That way you will have more detail, resolution and sharpness than the Olympus.
.

.
Again, look at the textures. The GH3 renders really fine details, while the Olympus looks too much digital.
.

.
Thats one of the best examples. Look how both cameras render the grass. The GH3 looks FAR superior. Its pretty clear.
.

.
Again, look at the fine textures. The GH3 has a much better resolution. The Olympus is so oversharpened that you can even see the halos around the details.
.

.
Look how much more shadow detail you have on the GH3. And you have less blown out highlights
.

.
Again, fine details on the GH3. Oversharpening and lower resolution on the Olympus.
.
.
.
.
.
Important thing: if you are watching this video in youtube without going full screen, you wont see the oversharpening and the lower resolution. Doing that you can be fooled by the oversharpening thinking that the Olympus is better. Once you go fullscreen, its pretty easy to see the differences. If you watch that video in a big screen TV its even better. Without youtube compression the difference is probably bigger.

The GH3 is, without a doubt, superior.
thedest is offline  
post #18 of 798 Old 10-27-2013, 05:20 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,657
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1428 Post(s)
Liked: 1541
Simply watching video, shot on a GH3 at default settings, on a high quality plasma, will remove all doubts about sharpness, detail and dynamic range.

To my eyes the image is so much better on a good quality, large screen display, as opposed to a relatively small computer monitor.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #19 of 798 Old 10-27-2013, 06:51 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Paulo Teixeira's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,728
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked: 33
So far Olympus cameras has way too many restrictions when it comes to shooting video. No 24p, no 60p and a recording time limit such as 22 minutes for the EP5 and 29 minutes for the EM1. Plus a lot can be debated when it comes to color reproduction and sometimes dynamic range but when it comes to pure resolution, theirs really not much to debate. If the top Olympus cameras was really more detailed than the top Panasonic cameras, that would be talked about in many camera forums but it's not.
Paulo Teixeira is offline  
post #20 of 798 Old 11-08-2013, 11:08 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Paulo Teixeira's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,728
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked: 33
Paulo Teixeira is offline  
post #21 of 798 Old 11-12-2013, 06:29 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
jogiba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,032
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 113 Post(s)
Liked: 75
jogiba is online now  
post #22 of 798 Old 11-12-2013, 06:36 AM
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
They just need a better wrap. Im afraid that companies will start offering 4k as the next big step and will keep giving us the same codecs, bits and color depths..
thedest is offline  
post #23 of 798 Old 11-12-2013, 07:07 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,657
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1428 Post(s)
Liked: 1541
Quote:
Originally Posted by jogiba View Post

GH4 sensor for 4K @ 30fps ? :
http://www.semicon.panasonic.co.jp/ds8/c3/IS00006AE.pdf

That's too bad. I think I'd personally wait for 4K @60p. The GH5 or a hack of the GH4?
Ken Ross is offline  
post #24 of 798 Old 11-12-2013, 07:20 AM
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
The GH4 will be more of a cinema camera, it wont be the "new GH3". Panasonic skips the "4" on its consumer produts. 4 means bad luck. The successor of the GH3 will probably be the GH5. They will be 2 different cameras. The GH5 will probably be a little bit worse @ video recording.
thedest is offline  
post #25 of 798 Old 11-12-2013, 04:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Paulo Teixeira's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,728
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedest View Post

They just need a better wrap. Im afraid that companies will start offering 4k as the next big step and will keep giving us the same codecs, bits and color depths..
Rumors pointed to the internal 4K codec being 10 bit 422. For people who wants an ever higher quality videos than the internal codec, just pair this camera up with the Odyssey 7Q (Or hope this camera gets hacked).

I'd definitely love 4K 60p as well but that probably would have increased the cost a bit. Still, Panasonic could be saving that for the 4K version of the AC90 that Panasonic showed off in the past. That camera will compete with the Sony AX1 and Z100.
Paulo Teixeira is offline  
post #26 of 798 Old 11-12-2013, 06:46 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,657
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1428 Post(s)
Liked: 1541
I'd take the Sony @60p every day of the week, but I'm sure I'd prefer the size of the Panasonic.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #27 of 798 Old 11-13-2013, 03:08 PM
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paulo Teixeira View Post

Rumors pointed to the internal 4K codec being 10 bit 422.

I heard those rumours, but I dont know.

In the specs of the camera it says that the output will be 200Mb/s.

The Blackmagic shoots 1080p 10-bit 422 at 220Mb/s. 4k has so much more data. If they are going to 4k 10-bit 422, I wonder how they will compress that keeping the image quality. Maybe a new codec?
thedest is offline  
post #28 of 798 Old 11-13-2013, 03:28 PM
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,313
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 196 Post(s)
Liked: 143
markr041 is offline  
post #29 of 798 Old 11-13-2013, 06:09 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Paulo Teixeira's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,728
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked: 33
ProRes for example is Intra Frame based and codec such as H.264 for example, can be eighter Intra or Inter based. Using an Inter based codec, you can get visually equal image quality at lower bit rates. That's what used when they want to keep the file sizes low. Also, with Inter based H.264 codecs, their can be all sorts of variations. Their is a GH2 hack called Sanity in which the lower Sanity settings is not too much higher than the stock GH2 codec unlike some other hacks but the quality is still much greater than stock.

It's true that right now, this is all a rumor and some of the specs might not entirely be accurate but it's true that even just the Inter based 100Mbps codec, if that was based on H.265 and Panasonic spent a lot of time adjusting it, that can still look decent. It's only the supposedly Intra based version which is 200Mbps, that may or many not be high enough even if the use of H.265 made it seam like 400Mbps of H.264. It might actually still be decent now that I think more about it. Also, having strong encoders can also effect the picture quality. With all that said, I'm sure Panasonic will be doing extensive testings on the motion quality of the codec. I'd still want to see it hacked though. Memory cards have gotten much faster.


http://www.sony.co.uk/res/attachment/file/20/1237491584820.pdf
Here's the specs of the Sony Z100. 30p is 300Mbps and 24p is 240Mbps. All Intra Frame based.

Panasonic is releasing an S35 sized camera so I really hope that's an indication that they wont gimp the M43 sized camera too much.
Paulo Teixeira is offline  
post #30 of 798 Old 11-13-2013, 08:18 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,657
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1428 Post(s)
Liked: 1541
The Sony is really a pretty big monster. I was playing with it at a Sony store a few days ago. I was actually surprised by how big it was.

I would have loved to have seen its output on the Sony 4K UHD TV that was sitting about 10' away.
Ken Ross is offline  
Reply Camcorders

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off