Very true and Priced at $4,995 retail. Not Bad!

http://pro.jvc.com/prof/attributes/features.jsp?model_id=MDL102132

Interesting: it divides the image into four quadrants, and records each one to one of four SDHC card simultaneously. Then you use software to combine the four streams into one editable 4k stream.

Of course we GH2 owners already have recording around 144 Mbps with a single SDHC card. ;)

Very interesting. I suppose they just went after the broadcast market since that's more of their thing already. They teased about this camera earlier last year. It makes me wonder if Canon will really release their 4K DSLR and how they'll manage the processing in camera. I'm assuming they'll use the newest CF technology rather than the SDHC route.

Basic question ... what are you going to watch this on? Does anyone know what the current state of 4K monitors is? There are no 4K computer monitors that I know of. 30 inch monitors top out at 2560 x 1600, well short of 4K.

@Ralph_B AMD just released the Radeon 7970 that supports 4K output, and AJA and BlackMagic have 4K cards. So the computer video card is already there waiting for a monitor.

Interestingly, Panasonic announced they have a 20" 4K IPS panel. So, theoretically the tech is there- just need someone like LG or Samsung to stick it in a computer display and charge the right 4 figures...

@disneytoy I agree. 2.5k makes a lot of sense for real-world production.

You can get 2.5K or near 2.5K on MJPEG and a fast card. I think I was able to do around 2.3K 16:9, without it telling me the card isn't fast enough etc.

News and broadcast @ 4K? Doubt it, esp with annoying post workflow of recombining files after dumping 4 cards.

Well.. if you want to composite shots a small sensor and large DOF can be quite helpful. So are the 4k, even if its only 4:2:0 it should carry at least the color information of 1080p 4:2:2. So if you aim for 1080p output this should be perfectly keyable. Last but not least the large resolution allows you to shot very wide and reframe+stabilize in post in a way we can only dream of. I would not jump onto this specific cam, I remember JVC where the first with handheld HDV recorder as well, and it sucked. But in general I believe many people are interested in these high resolutions. Even if they are never displayed on a 4K screen. http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/15/tvlogic-debuts-56-inch-lum-560w-4k-x-2k-lcd-a-few-years-ahead-of/

@mpgxsvcd

Very strange post from you :-) Calm down. It is not very hard to make thing that'll resolve even 8k.

@Vitaliy_Kiselev

It may not be hard but I see people post time and time again that 1080p means it resolves 1920x1080. Just trying to make it clear that 4K doesn't mean it is any better. It is the same thing as what Bloom tested. All of the cameras were 1080p cameras. However, some of them had a whole lot more actual resolution than others did.

I am skeptical of how much actual resolution this camera has. It is too easy for them to say it is 4K when it is less because they know most people are not actually going to test it. I know I couldn't test it. I don't have a monitor or printer that could do anywhere near that resolution on a normal piece of photo paper.

So what camera actually resolves 8K resolution? I would love to see how much that runs.

@mpgxsvcd Just because you don't have a monitor that can go that resolution doesn't mean you can't tell it's sharp or not. I edit on a Lenovo T500 laptop from my job that only has a 1280x800 screen and if I view footage at 100% it is still a 1 to 1 ratio even if I can only see a small part of the image at once. It does however make want an old T61 instead with 2048x1536.

I'd rather have a 720p camera that shoots clean, sharp, artifact free images and has good color, minimal skew and Jellovision. I'm much concerned about a clean image with noise, moire, aliasing, banding and other nasties reduced to nominal levels as opposed to super duper resolution. And the workflow for that thing, like most 4k systems, doesn't look fun.