I wish we could have a Micro SATA connector and go right out to a SSD.

802.11n Wi-Fi direct will be enough, if pair it with USB 3.0 micro connector with host ability :-)

And I think GH3 will have both.

@disneytoy

No, I just saying that most probably it'll have USB 3.0 connection.

Otherwise I am all for camera that have 5 USB only connectors with full host capabilities for each, so you can connect soundcards, HID controls, monitors, etc

Yeah I am thinking it will have 1080p50/60, I mean the TM700 has had it for years. It appears that the electronic global shutter is not going to be on it...and thats disappointing. It would also be nice if there were some anamorphic ratios available on it, I think the Olympus has this, that would be great!

BTW, what do you guys think of 4K in a photocamera (like the canon 1D-C) ? At first i thought "woooaa", but then I gave it a bit more thought, and I think it's just about this wooaa issue. If someone shoots 4K, it's for a high-end professional use, then he'd just get a real camera. 4K shouldn't be put on DSLR and hybrids just like that, the point is only to sell more of them 4K captors and keep the price of their C500 a bit down. (But they might get blow away by the sony FS700, if the 4K upgrade really holds its promises).

So i hope Panasonic won't put 4K in the GH3.

Talking about that, my instinct says the retail price of the GH3 could be around 1500$ (or 1400 € or so).

@bwhitz : i didn't say "fake" camera, i just mean that a photocamera wouldn't be suited for the use that someone directing a 4K film needs. 4K is big cinema, not tv, not blu ray, not internet.... and if one works for a professional movie (feature film), and invests in a 4K dslr, he could just as well have invested in a GH2 or a Mark3, and put the rest of the money in lighting, sound, effects, accessories, decors, and so on...

That's just my opinion as beginner in the industry (in a crappy country).

And why i say the GH3 shouldn't have 4K is a price reason : with 4K it would be more expensive, and i'd rather use that money to get the best out of 1080p and sound options.

With such progress we could end up with 8K 3D raw camera to the release date :-)

@bwhitz : that's the point, in my backward-thinking country (and from comments i've read on so many forums of other countries), you're just not taken seriously if you want to direct a big professional project with a pocket-sized photocamera in your hand...... that's why so many people buy rigs, who cares about matte boxes inside, it's just about making the whole stuff look serious. If the crew feels it's just a hobby movie, they won't give a 100%.... not to mention the actors. When i prepared my first short movie, i used my fuji HS10 to shoot castings and rehearsals (for those who don't know, it was a 400€ photocam with ultrazoom, full HD 30p, HD 60p). When the actors saw it they asked "what, are you also going to shoot the movie with that ?" (on the tone of "you're kidding me , righto ?" ) , i had to reassure them, production would use sony EX1, which looks a lot more serious.

@brianluce "Nope, absolutely false. This is not a matter of opinion, it's just false. Directing, operating, and Dp'ing are discreet jobs, no matter what camera a person has."

Nope. This is absolutely false. :) DP's were born out of necessity of shooting on the celluloid format, and the process it required. Digital is bypassing this process now. Besides, a director that cannot get the right look without a DP is not a real director. Real directors see movies shot, edited, a scored in their heads. There's no reason that they can't shoot their own movies now if they truly have "a vision" and the technology allows it to be completed in a timely manner.

Film is a visual medium. If a director only works with "drama" and "actors" they should stick to live theater. Nobody see's the performances an actor gives on set, only the performances that were captured through the lens count. The directors job is holistic, not separate.

If you still think they should be separate, and a directors only role is to guide the actors, then they should absolutely not be credited with the creative authorship of the film. It's just illogical and disrespectful to the crew that the director is basically now taking credit for. The title should be changed to something along the lines of "performance supervisor" and put after editing and cinematography.

I just sick of hearing of film constantly being called a "collaborative art" but then only the director being credited with the "vision" and authorship. It's just sickening. Either it's fully collaborative and NOBODY gets complete control and authorship of the product. Or it's an auteur medium, where the director could, and pending the time/schedule limits of the film, does perform all of the major creative film crafts (him/her)self. You can't have both and say it's collaborative, then have people pour their talents into your film, and turn around and take credit for it. It's BS.

@brianluce

Real directors must do it all by themselfs. Yep, including music (not just score, but play it on all instruments), special effects, stunts.

Anyway, back on topic : 4K in a photocamera is a marketing issue. It won't cost more "technically", but because a camera is gifted with 4K, marketeers might make us pay twice as much.

Same as canon C300....how much better is it compared to Mark3 or GH2 ? it has more possibilities, but still a comparable image quality....for a price that is in a completely different league, because Canon marketeers feel that this is the price to pay for these advantages.

So, if Panasonic markets a 4K capable GH3....either it totally blows up the market by selling it around 1500 $, or it aligns on the competition and sells it above 3000 $ (which is still very cheap compared to C500, FS700 and Scarlet).

Or it can gift it with a hidden 4K potential, marketed as a 2K camera, and wait for Vitaliy to hack it so that only the real "pros" can benefit from the 4K without blowing up the market. (I wonder if there are any statistics about which percentage of sold GH2's have been hacked).

For me, what I would like to see on GH3 is better photo capabilities. I find the photos taken with GH1 or GH2 subpar even to the Ricoh GRDx or the decade old E-1, let alone competing against OM-D or the likes of Canon and Nikon. I hate lugging one camera for photos and an another camera for video. I would add weather sealed and 1080/60p or 50p (since even the Sony HX9v or RX100 can do that already). And how about some digital filter presets to emulate Kodak Vision 3 and Fuji film looks? The market for DSLR is sure getting crowded, the performance bar keeps improving, and Panasonic is going to need some true differentiators.

I can think of a couple of ways they have their cake and eat it too. One would be to have different purchasable firmware configurations or an appstore of sorts, but consumers generally don't like the idea of paying twice as much for something that is just software limited, I would like it myself because you would only pay for the features that you needed.

The other way would be to have 2 battery grips, one a conventional photography based vertical grip that would be cheap, two a video focused grip/module attachment, that could have things like XLR inputs, microphone monitoring, highspeed bus to SSD or multi memory cards, pure HDMI output, higher colorspacing. People are generally more tolerant of hardware based expansion.

Either option would let them aim at multi markets and price brackets

@bwhitz : nah, Belgium, and i'm educated in the french-speaking side, where no movie can be bankable, they all rely heavily on state-sponsored subsidies and tax shelters, which are all in the hands of the socialists. These people spit on entertainment, all they want are pseudo-artistic poor filmmaking about crappy poor depressing people. Most of their high ranking officials have zero understanding of any technical aspect in cinema.... if you want the job, you must show a big camera or a rig, so they think "uhm, looks professional enough", but usually sucking up to the right people and defending socialist ideas should be enough :D

On the flemish side, they are building a real film industry, with american-style filming. I'm trying to work my way into there as screenwriter first.