Personal View site logo
Make sure to join PV on Telegram or Facebook! Perfect to keep up with community on your smartphone.
GH3 rumors topic
  • 869 Replies sorted by
  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    It wouldn't make sense to output a 48 fps file, would it?

    It makes perfect sense.

    I do not get all this "sourced". Each mode here is different.

  • danyyyeldanyyyel

    @LongJohnSilver "mirrorless and dsrl are different markets so guessing gh3 price based on dxxxxx price is clueless."

    How come, for 99% of people, their is only one determining factor and it is size. What M43 brought was nearly dslr quality in a nearly compact size camera. Tell most people if they know if one has a mirror or not and if they care. Now If the gh3 is bigger it might be at least the same size as entry level dslr. Look at 43rumors site when they said that the gh3 might be bigger and how many complained that m43 camera are becoming too big and that it was not the prime purpose. The gh2 started at around $ 800/900 body but you only had with kit lens. What people are saying that the price should be in the $ 1500 to $ 2000 body only that I find ridiculous. If when adding some accessories with xlr audio etc it comes at this price, that is another thing.

    Just a little perspective, look at a general video-maker site like nofilmschool, yesterday they did an article on the rumors on the gh3 with all its juicy features. What 15 comment, with 5 being mine. Lets say it was about some fk lame rehashed barely hd moire/alias canon camera and it would be at least 50+. I am a Nikon photographer and I would really like the gh2/3 to be more well known outside of the small m43 world because it is an incredible video tool. But I can't see it if the price is too high.

  • danyyyeldanyyyel

    From the latest rumors, will the gh3 do 120fps. I am not the biggest fan of slow motion, but this is one very marketable feature nowadays where everything is slowmotion.

  • mpgxsvcdmpgxsvcd

    @Vitaliy_Kiselev

    By sourced I mean each one of those slow motion modes records at a specific frame rate and then slows it down to match a 24p frame rate. It is often called "sensor output". For 80% it would have to “sourced/sensor output” of 30p in order to get to 24p. For 50% it would have to be “sourced/sensor output” from 48p. And for 40% it would have to be “sourced/sensor output” from 60p.

    What I didn’t think made sense is to “source” the 50% from 48 FPS video. It would make more sense to source it from 60p footage and output the final file at 30 FPS instead of 24 FPS. The difference between 40% and 50% slow motion is not really significant. However, outputting at both frame rates gives you the ability to easily inter-cut the footage in with either 24p or 30p footage.

    I don’t think all of the slow motion modes will produce 24p files. I believe at least one of them will have a 30p final output. The FZ200 outputs at 30p for its 25% slow motion mode. I will be surprised if the GH3 doesn’t have that mode as well.

    High Speed Video: 1,280 x 720 pixels [NTSC Model] MP4, 30fps (Sensor output is 120fps) [PAL Model] MP4, 25fps (Sensor output is 100fps) 640 x 480 pixels [NTSC Model] MP4, 30fps (Sensor output is 240fps) [PAL Model] MP4, 25fps (Sensor output is 200fps)

    http://panasonic.net/avc/lumix/compact/fz200/specifications.html

  • danyyyeldanyyyel

    Looking at the rumors I see that there will be a 50 mbs normal/long gop mode. I think it is very good because I am not sure if 72 mbs is enough to have good intra codec quality. If the rummored price of $ 1700 with the 14-140 is exact, I think it is good. It would roughly put the camera body at $ 1100 as a start price. I don't see any mention of hdmi output, will it have recordable uncompressed hdmi output or Pana is satisfied with the higher bitrate in standard.

  • meemee

    @danyyyel I really don't feel you need to worry about a few people willing to pay more spoiling it for those of us unable to pay more. Panasonic knows their target crowd, and knows they can't get carried away with the pricing. If the camera body was over 1K, I personally would be saving my penny's and waiting for the GH5 instead, no matter how great the GH3 is (and I am sure it will be tits), I bet allot of others would do the same. I do agree with Vitaliy, and don't think panasonic holds much stock in what we all say, wish, or actually think about pricing. I just don't think they will take over the market with a giant price jump on a well known and loved line of camera, because making the camera accessible for the masses is what will win them the race. IMHO.

  • shianshian

    The specs on this are looking great. If they are true, and its offered at an affordable price, it will be a great camera.

    Unfortunately, I never should have started playing with the BMD footage. I'm getting RAW envy. I really miss working in a RAW workflow both as a DP and a Colorist. That will be my next "wishlist hack" some sort of RAW bypass type recording format.

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    @shian

    I think future of such cameras like GH3 lies in completely customizable in camera raw processing, not in raw output. With all settings residing in very good tablet application.

  • shianshian

    @Vitaliy_Kiselev that is an awesome idea!

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    @shian

    I have lots of ideas. Trouble is, most of them suck. (c) GC

    I'm a visionary; I'm ahead of my time. Trouble is, I'm only about an hour and a half ahead. (c) Same

  • endotoxicendotoxic

    I think that is the future also. Like old school film stoks. It was not entirely the latitude or resolution what make the mood. And its a very creative way of having options.

  • shianshian

    I'm actually shocked that more companies haven't copied the R3D method.

    I really love being able to output a LUT for monitoring and still recording "RAW" like with the RED. Having the option to record a flat image, but output a "look" makes post for me a lot more accurate and fun. A low cost camera that can do that (in the sub $7000 range) would be a real game changer. Being able to add a tablet interface to create and control the look, and option to bake-in or record flat if you so desire, would certainly meet with what others from the traditional video world might want.

    If I owned a camera company, that would be my top priority. You can always add the latest chip, more megapixels, higher data rates, etc. But a flexible Log>Linear/Linear>Log - baked or unbaked in-camera workflow just makes sense in our time.

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    @shian

    You are just tech man, same as Red guys.

    Most camera companies are looking at practical tasks and requirements of their clients.
    Belive me, as soon as using proper raw format (in option for interframe compression) will be fast and easy and will be demanded by their clients, you'll get all this.

  • MarkVMarkV

    @Vitaliy So WHEN do you think we all start using raw format? Is the time of raw in all these cameras next year? 2014? What is your prespective for the future?

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    @MarkV

    As for normal people (I mean individuals and small teams, not narrative team crew) - not in the near future. As I said, probably we'll have expert modes in about 2 years time allowing to change raw processing as you wish. About 2-3% will be using it. It is same as with good hardware synths, crowd constantly complains about no sufficient editing, too few simultaneous effects, but extremely few people actually use this.

    In the near future we'll see more fast frame rates, 4K and 3D things.

  • ahblezaahbleza

    @kholi Regarding XLR input, I would expect (if rumor is correct) that it looks something like this:

    http://visualjournalist.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/dxa-5d.jpg

  • mpgxsvcdmpgxsvcd

    @Vitaliy_Kiselev

    Please don't delete this post. It pertains specifically to the GH3.

    Everyone knows that the write speed of the card is the main factor for writing movies on the GH2. However, most people don't realize that card write speed had nothing to do with taking burst pictures with the GH2. This is text from the GH2 manual.

    "First burst speed has no relation with the transfer speed of the card."

    With the GH2 burst mode it actually wrote the pictures to the buffer first. Therefore, the buffer speed was the limiting factor. I think in the more recent models it can start writing the pictures to the card and clearing out the buffer before the burst is finished.

    This line was removed for the G5 and I assume it will not be present in the GH3 manual. It seems like they have started taking advantage of the faster cards in the more recent models.

    The GH2 only required a class 4 card for videos and a class 6 card for burst stills. I wonder if the GH3 will require a high speed card or just a class 10 card?

  • danyyyeldanyyyel

    With the amount of Data that raw needs, I personally don't see it being used in anything except high end commercial advertising or movie or arty work. A good log mode in 10/12 bit will be more than good enough for 95% of work. Something like cineform compress raw could be an elegant solution somehow for a wider usage of RAW.

  • bozfxbozfx

    @danyyyel I was about to say the same thing! RAW is slow to work with (requiring top end hardware) and it takes up tons of space. You need top end storage solutions and computer hardware when using RAW, and that ain't cheap. So while RAW is the most gradable solution, it is also comes with a pretty hefty price. I'd love a good 10-bit log solution myself. Way easier to work with, less hardware requirements, space, etc. Sure it's not as flexible as RAW, but it's no where near as painful either.

    Edit: I forgot to mention the Alexa, which 80%+ of the industry uses with ProRes output, not RAW. And these are folks with deep pockets. It's just way easier & faster to go with a good log file. :)

  • shianshian

    Coming from a 35mm background, EVERYTHING is easier than the old 35mm workflow. This generation has become spoiled. Never had to edit on a reel to reel, splice and glue film, calculate the precise number of frames to perform perfect dissolves by hand, edit a work print to create a final negative, and then color time.

    To those of us who have experienced (however brief) the old way of doing things, everything about digital is a breeze, and we don't mind if it takes a little extra effort... because it's worth it.

    And the storage and high-end system knock is bullshit. 10 years ago, I was working with 4k film scans using lo-res proxies on a dual Pentium III 800 system with half a GB of ram, and software that was nowhere near as intuitive as what we have today. R3D is raw, and I've been editing and grading it on external FW800 drives on my Macbook Pro. Where there's a will, there's a way. But I don't envy those who want things to be easier. Chances are, you're in the express lane to mediocrity.

    Nothing worthwhile is ever easy.

  • bozfxbozfx

    Gee, thanks for the slam, @Shian , it's appreciated. Perhaps I should change my name to Mr. Mediocre because I want a sensible compromise from the output of a Prosumer camera. I've been working in the VFX industry for 16 years now. I've used & graded R3D files, Alexa files, Dalsa files, and film-scanned Cineon files on After Effects, Nuke, and Fusion. I've also seen the file sizes these files produce. R3D files are compressed so they take up less space and therefore use less storage. But even they are relatively large (mostly due to their 4K/5K resolution).

    If you're a pro, none of this probably matters. Pros have deeper pockets than the rest of us and make $$$ from the equipment they invest in. However, I'd say the GH market is prosumer at best. Sure there are some pros using GH2s, but compared to the other cameras out there the pros use, the GH market is drop in the bucket. Use whatever you like. I'm just saying there is nothing easy about RAW (except grading, of course), and I stand by it. Nearly all of the TV shows that are shooting on Alexa do so using ProRes output, not RAW. They do so because it's more efficient for them. There's nothing mediocre about that.

  • AriaAria

    IMO this is a great sign from Panasonic. They learned from the customers what they needed to do and then they went and made the product people wanted. The fact that they took the GH3 in this direction rather than save these features for an AF200 or something tells me that they are in fact capable of change and adapting to the market rather than ignoring them and doing only what they want to do. A PRO GH is a wonderful thing IMO.

    If we look at many of the things we listed on wish lists many of those things are rumored to be in this camera and if these things are true then I will surely be a continued happy customer. How can anyone find fault with this kind of camera at what I would assume will be a sub $2,000.00 price point? I can't wait to see what the changes in image quality are going to be. If they improved the DR and highlight handling, then i'm gonna be a happy camper. For me the toughest thing is dealing with highlights. I'm also hoping they give us a 4:2:2 color so we can have a bit more smoothness. All the other stuff is just icing on the cake for my needs.

  • disneytoydisneytoy

    If it can do 48p, I'd hope we can gave an HDR feature like RED and Magic Lantern. Also, wondering if wifi and apps will allow a true wireless follow focus. That would be cheap to implement and a really cool demo feature.

  • Greek_m43Greek_m43

    Wrote a post about the rumored specs of the GH3 for my buddy. http://thenewcinematographers.com/?p=876

  • shianshian

    Sorry for offending you, dude. I respect your work, man. I wasn't calling anyone out specifically. If the shoe doesn't fit, don't wear it (or better yet ignore me). Only meant to ruffle the feathers of those whom the shoe fits.

This topic is closed.
← All Discussions