Well we have some good news! The Panasonic 4K Gh camera displayed at CES in Las Vegas is not a mockup, it’s a real camera that will be officially launched in February!!!
Engadget reports that the camera will cost less than $2,000 and…
UHD content can be recorded at 200 Mbps, and output in a full live feed via a mini-HDMI port (thanks to ALL-I Intra mode) to display on a computer or record to a hard drive. Of course, the Micro-Four Thirds shooter can save footage straight to an SDXC card — a UHS Class 3 prototype variant tuned for such a task was on display — though space will run out fairly quickly.
And I am pretty sure Sony will be the next company launching such a 4K mirrorless camera!
5 Responses
I compared it with Gh3 back and front. No change except the 4K sticker in place of GH3 logo (or on it). but as its displayed in panasonic booth (we hope) and is a mock up, its just there as representative of 4K GH. Also in closed glass box
This camera might become the ‘standard’ camera of photojournalists.
Pulling Stills out of 4k video would capture just about anything in front of you
provided the shutter speed is fast enough.
A 4k Still would be good enough for most newspapers and all news web sites.
At under $2,000 and having the 4/3 form factor this camera could ‘force’ itself into every photojournalist’s bag.
“provided the shutter speed is fast enough”, yes… and also you need a lot of time to identify the correct frame, in case you get any… Also, for newspapers, a frame captured in HD is normally enough, as you get a picture of 1920×1080 pixels at 72 dpi. Investing in 4K is nonsense except for some movie theaters.
For my purposes, print media, I have found HD not quite good enough in resolution due to the fact my video camera, once set up at a press conference, etc, has a differenet view than the view I capture with my still camera at the same event.
The video has to be set wider to start with as subjects move all the time.
This requires me to crop the HD frame, which does not take much time to find, even sitting in my car, doing so in camera, when your still captures are not the best,
usually due to subject movement, facial expression, staring off into space, etc.
My guess is that the 4k used in this manner would produce more useable cropped frames, of higher resolution than I get using HD.
Personally, for viewing movies, I agree with you that 4k seems to be overkill,
especially as it takes over my present computing hardware.
Why will it fill up the memory card so fast when filming 4K? Does it lack the new 4K optimized H265 codec?