Hope this post will keep going on its way, exchanging constructive ideas. It's Night time in China, will have to leave at that point. I have to admit that I am a gear head as well and I am having far too many lenses, cameras, lighting and other stuff. I will invest in a GH4 (especially at that price), and I will keep renting a fancier camera when the production or the client ask for it. And I wil be pleased to work with it, but bigger and better the camera less freedom I get. Bigger budget means higher pressure, more people involved (art director, agency, client), no space for innovation or inspiration (at least in China) and no room for mistakes. Then, 4:4:4, raw file and all that stuff make complete sens, but this doesnt concern the type of camera I am buying and needing for my short movies and usual work. I am happy on both side of the spectrum, but my favorite position is to be a small potatoe on big project (ex; in charge of the Making Of of TVC) or a big potatoe on a small project (ex; Directing my own movies) to preserve myself from pressure and convention, to set free my inspiration and to endlessly renew the pleasure of shooting. The only exciting job to do under pressure without loosing any bit of joy is shooting a feature film, as all is about creativity with a large team and great gears...

My gut feeling is that the expansion interface is necessary for 4:2:2 10 bit 4K, but not 4:2:2 10 bit 1080P. The PDF specifications state the format is available via HDMI but does not specify resolution nor whether it's mini HDMI on the camera or standard HDMI on the expansion. Either way I don't believe 4K uncompressed is necessary at this time until later down the road when it's standard, it's just nice to be prepared without buying a mecha-godzilla attachment later.

Hey...the more folks that are early adopters of the gh4, the faster the tech dribbles to the g line. And I still love my crippled ( no shutter button) gh1 running reliable playback. And my first comment on the gh4 is....the brick is absurd, but the camera is outstanding. I have zero interest in 4k but the camera alone shooting 1080/96p is very nice. Then again look at the new pany v750's which will framedouble 120p to 240. No one is even getting in the ballpark except panasonic.

How many of you have either directly lost a job or had to use a different camera because the client explicitly stated that it must be 10 bit 4:2:2? I know there are cases where the clients would specify such things. I am just wondering how many people on here have encountered those scenarios?

Seems there are two arguments being mixed up here. There's the, is it the brush or the artist argument, and then there's an argument about brushes. As to the first, it's clear to me that the artist is more important than the tool. A good film maker will produce better work on an iPhone than a bad film maker will on an ARRI Alexa.

As to the second question, I think that the GH4 is a much bigger improvement over the GH3 than the GH1 was over the GH2 or the GH3 was over the GH2 ... even taking taking the hacks into consideration. The addition of peaking and zebra display should lead to practical improvements when using the camera without an external monitor. 4:2:2 10 bit output will grade better and improve dynamic range. Detail should be much better, especially when downsampling 4K footage. 4K also allows for lossless digital zoom and better stabilization.

If people didn't need it then why has the majority of this site been clamoring for such possibilities since the GH1 and earlier? I have to agree with @DanPV. Many videographers have been trying to emulate physical 35mm film since DSLRs became available. You'd have to hope this will take them many steps closer if not equal with.

I can't imagine that the new settings of the GH4 won't be welcome tools for many users. Having the Master Pedestal, Cinelike D and Cinelike V, the Ability to adjust curves and the slow mo. Luminance ranges 16-235, 16-255 and 0255. There's just a ton of stuff Pany threw into this camera. IMO this is the most feature packed VDSLR ever made and it most definitely would allow anyone with some skill to make better videos. If it had built in ND it would be darn near perfect. Also since they've added improved sensor cooling the conditions under which we can work with the camera are more flexible and it should be a more dependable tool.

I love my GH1, but at the same time the limitations can't be totally ignored. Making a camera more convenient and flexible in different lighting conditions isn't a small thing. having more tools like zebras and focus peaking aren't small things either. Many of the features of the GH4 would make work less hit and miss and also give us some leeway when it comes to the final product. Starting with that 4K image gives us some options when going to 1080p.

Guys, I am very glad to see the way the discussion went through. Thanks to all your valuable input. It is very rewarding and it also helped me to consider things in a different way. I am 50 years old, and I started shooting short movies with Hi8 in 1995 with analog edit. What a pain! I shot a feature film on Sony DigiBeta (720 x 480) in Taiwan in 2000. Video was edited on a very slow and buggy PC and then copied to 35mm film to be projected in theater. What a pain and what a cost! I am coming from an area where dream were big, but tools were inexistent or weak or far too expensive, out of reach. This background explains my minimalist approach in filmmaking. When the HVX200 came out it was a first step, but GH1 was the tool I was waiting for since 15 years, whatever limitation it gets. It is 1000 times better than Hi8 or DV, 100 times better than DigiBeta, and GH4 is just something coming from another dimension.

As many people are mentioning here, the GH4 is a major step up, the real one since the GH1came out and I will have more reasons to buy a GH4 than I had to invest into a GH2 or GH3 (even I did as it was useful for my job). For pro job, I am not sure GH4 is going to eat up Canon 5D demand, as many clients knows about it and are asking for 5D for the full frame look, if they don't go mainstream (Red or Alexa). For documentary job, my AF100 is still more practical (efficient) than a GH: Internal ND filter, direct control of the sound recording, XLR connection on the right place (which is not the case of the brick under the GH4 which limits the opening of the screen and unbalance the cam) and all the preset are already there. I have done lots of work with it and 4K is not needed for my client as final video is posted on the web and burned to DVD... You can check it here: https://vimeo.com/album/2111562 Actually I am considering the GH4 for my personal work as it will help my creativity and assist me in my one man team. For example, 4K will give me the opportunity to add more camera movement in post (dolly move, tilt, pan...) and to stabilize it without losing definition. 96fps at 1080p is also a feature I will consider while writing new stories. I will not buy the brick, 4:2:0 8 bits was fine with me until now and I can keep that way, as AVCHD never break down in post for me. A sample about this. Color grading done on a GH1 for the short film "La Deuche from Hell"

@ brianl Be fair and check the outdoor video as well. Revolverte and La Deuche from Hell, were both shot in summer in natural bright light. FYI, some years ago, I made a living as a pro photographer with a Nikon D200 which get less than 8 stops of dynamic range and I just needed to know how to frame, and to choose the right composition to not get out of the range of the camera. Have you heard about the Magic Hour? Being there at the right timing to get a beautiful lighting and a less contrasty scenery to shoot without worrying about DR problem. If contrast of the scene is too high and I have no lighting at hand, I treat my subject as a silhouette. 13 stops dynamic range is very far behind what your eyes can see so you still have to adjust your composition according the limitation of your camera. Also, there is many tricks in post to increase the dynamic range by adjusting different area of the image. I am using a D800 for photography work now (the king of DR so far) and I can still reach its limit easily. This is part of our job to know how to adjust our framing and set up our lighting to not meet the headroom. Not a problem for me to not get 10 stops instead of 13, even I know 13 is much better than 10... So what. Any problem in my outdoor video? IF the GH4 provides 13 stops, very nice, but it is not going to change my way of workings so much. One improvement I am looking for is to get a less clinical image out of the camera. GH1 was perfect, GH2 got more videoish and GH3 is 100% video feel camera. And I think the most attractive part of BM camera is the look of the footage out of the box, much more cinematic than what I get out of a GH3. I am just afraid that GH4 will get even deeper in the clinical feel of the image...

I agree with you brianl, somehow out of DR limit consideration, something even more important is the look of the blown highlight. If the highlight keeps pure white, it can be even interesting to work with it. For example, the worst things about the AF100 compare to GH (even DR is similar) is the way the burned highlight turns out to fluorescent green or yellow sometime (whatever set up on the camera: knee, gamma...): and it is awful to cure that thing in post. Again, as I know it, I am careful setting up my light with a guy dressing in white like in my short "WMatching Future HD (US)." As you mention, having a flat answer out of the camera is a key point to get room to work with it, and I got it out of a GH1, despite its limitation on paper. Out of aliasing and moire, one more thing need to get solve is the rolling shutter effect. I worked with CCD camera before (HVX200) and it was a joy to use in any condition.

Brianl, I think you are right. The final use of the video is dragging the decision of which camera and which format to use. Will 4K make it? In US, Japan and Europe, there is room for it, but I don't know what is going on, in the rest in the world. On my own experience, connection in/out China with or without VPN is really slow and HD video are never watched smoothly in streaming. And there is no improvement in the last 9 years, as quality of connection is counter balanced by increasing number of connected people and media offered online... I don't know what is the evolution in other populated countries such as Indonesia, Brasil or India, but 4K limitation might come from connection's speed first. For movie theater released, I am not sure, due to the online competition, they will have the money to upgrade their equipment for 4k video projection everywhere. As I wrote earlier, my own reality now, is to be able to upload my video on Vimeo, in HD version and a 4K camera would just add some feature in post with camera movement and lossless stabilization.

I come from the audio world and we went thru a similar issue some years ago where there wasn't much more we could squeeze out of the technology. You can record some extremely high quality audio with very cheap gear now that you wouldn't be able to do back in the day when I started in the late 70's. At this point it's mostly about know how rather than gear that separates the average joe from guys with access to the top gear. It ruined my studio business. Even tho I had lots of great gear and years of know how, guys just felt that they got close enough with the home studio stuff they had. It may not have been the best but it was good enough. Especially when you consider most of the public is listening to MP3's and such anyway. It makes me wonder about the real success of 4K. Will the public feel the need to splurge for it? Sure some with deep pockets and wanting to always have the latest and greatest will, but the wider market in general is hard to tell. None of my Recording studio clients came in asking for 24bit/192K recording even tho I had that capability.

@Aria I've thought about that too, how audio is a glimpse into the future of video. People have basically settled for a compressed version of CD quality as being good enough.

I'm on the fence on HD --- 4K and how much average joe will care. I would bet my bottom dollar that 4K --- 8K will not become mainstream for a loooooong time, if ever.