# Canon to Target The GH4 With New DSLR Type? [CR2]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Dec 15, 2014)

```
<p>We’re told that Canon will be directly targeting the Panansonic GH4 at NAB 2015 in Las Vegas this spring. The new camera will  have a 1″ sensor, shoot 4K and will be very portable, which sounds like <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/12/more-on-the-coming-4k-camcorder-cr2/" target="_blank">similar specs to an upcoming camcorder</a>. This little camera will have a removable viewfinder and grip and will most likely be small enough to be mounted to drones and other like devices.</p>
<p>The term “a different style DSLR” was used when describing this camera, but I’m not sure what sort of lens mount the camera would have, EF? EF-S? EF-M? Something new? A DSLR with a 1″ sensor? <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/12/opinion-does-cinema-eos-mark-the-end-of-high-spec-canon-dslr-video/" target="_blank">I wrote a few days ago that I didn’t think Canon would care much about this market</a>, which I guess was wrong, as this comes from a solid source. I do hold on to the idea that the professional cinema market being where growth is going to come from. We’re hoping for more information in the coming weeks.</p>
<p><em>More to come…</em></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## preppyak (Dec 15, 2014)

Well, the 1" sensor also means they are also competing with the digital bolex, the BMCC and BMPCC, and a handful of other strong, cheap options. Find it hard to believe they'll drop ProRes or RAW support into their camera like the other manufacturers have...so, it'll be interesting to see what Canon does to not make the product dead on arrival.


----------



## Ivar (Dec 15, 2014)

Canon has done its best over some years for now to convince everybody that wait no big surprises.
Yeah, shines at something, yet lacks at the same time putting the end product in the middle of other offerings rather than on top.

See what has happened to once famous brand name. No one-product will make this up what took years to build and abandon.


----------



## powershot2012 (Dec 15, 2014)

Boring Canon yet again. Stop targeting start innovating!

First they targeted the Sony RX100 III and just like the Canon G1X II, missed the target.

Now targeting Panasonic....jeeez!!




Canon Rumors said:


> <p>We’re told that Canon will be directly targeting the Panansonic GH4 at NAB 2015 in Las Vegas this spring. The new camera will have a 1″ sensor, shoot 4K and will be very portable, which sounds like <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/12/more-on-the-coming-4k-camcorder-cr2/" target="_blank">similar specs to an upcoming camcorder</a>. This little camera will have a removable viewfinder and grip and will most likely be small enough to be mounted to drones and other like devices.</p>
> <p>The term “a different style DSLR” was used when describing this camera, but I’m not sure what sort of lens mount the camera would have, EF? EF-S? EF-M? Something new? A DSLR with a 1″ sensor? <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/12/opinion-does-cinema-eos-mark-the-end-of-high-spec-canon-dslr-video/" target="_blank">I wrote a few days ago that I didn’t think Canon would care much about this market</a>, which I guess was wrong, as this comes from a solid source. I do hold on to the idea that the professional cinema market being where growth is going to come from. We’re hoping for more information in the coming weeks.</p>
> <p><em>More to come…</em></p>
> <p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>


----------



## Orangutan (Dec 15, 2014)

powershot2012 said:


> Boring Canon yet again.


Boring *and profitable* Canon yet again.



> Stop targeting start innovating!



Innovating is financially risky: Sony has been "innovating" themselves into near-bankruptcy for years.

Of course I love to see innovation, it's simply not financially reasonable for a profitable company like Canon. Why market a lot of "innovative" products when your competitors are willing to find the (financial) duds for you?


----------



## gsealy (Dec 15, 2014)

It's interesting. It seems that Canon is responding to both the 4K push and the fact that in general DSLR sales are falling off. They have to expand their presence and market reach to remain profitable. 

It says mounted to a drone? That seems to hit at the GoPro products. That market is wild right now as evidenced by GoPro's stock. 

The thing that I will want to know is how and where the 4K files will be stored. 4K files consume storage like crazy.


----------



## hachu21 (Dec 15, 2014)

1" sensor? Are you sure of the swapable lens? Does 1" sensor + EF/EF-S makes any sense?
Even with EF-M (all STM for video), the 22m f/2 turn into a 60mm equiv. lens and the 18-55mm turns into a 50-150mm
More reasonably (Canon style), a link with this?
RX10 and FZ1000 are somehow "a different style DSLRs" ;D


----------



## antonioleandro (Dec 15, 2014)

How come this new camera will have 4K video and the 7D II does not?

I would understand if Canon released updated versions of the C line cameras with 4K video, or maybe (hopefully) 5D IV with 4K video. But cutting 4K of the (almost) flagship DSLRs and putting it in a small sensor camera? I don´t understand.


----------



## PureClassA (Dec 15, 2014)

So far as targeting vs. innovating. Take Wendys for example. They let others like McDonalds do the location research and put up a store, then Wendys will follow behind to take market share without having spent the capital to figure out where to go. At least they used to years ago. Been very successful for them.

That said I understand the frustration that Canon should be the leader, and I agree. If they are going after a video DSLR, I'd rather see them hit the Sony A7s with a great full frame and insane low light capability with a true Canon Log HDMI output to go a Shogun or the sort. I know, probably wishful thinking. ... and no, not a 1DC for $10k. IF Sony can produce a monster like the A7s for $2500, so can Canon.


----------



## hoodlum (Dec 15, 2014)

hachu21 said:


> 1" sensor? Are you sure of the swapable lens? Does 1" sensor + EF/EF-S makes any sense?
> Even with EF-M (all STM for video), the 22m f/2 turn into a 60mm equiv. lens and the 18-55mm turns into a 50-150mm
> More reasonably (Canon style), a link with this?
> RX10 and FZ1000 are somehow "a different style DSLRs" ;D



That link is what I was thinking of too. But that would make it more a competitor with the FZ1000 which supports 4k video, not the GH4 which has a larger sensor and interchangeable lenses.


----------



## Bob Howland (Dec 15, 2014)

hachu21 said:


> 1" sensor? Are you sure of the swapable lens? Does 1" sensor + EF/EF-S makes any sense?
> Even with EF-M (all STM for video), the 22m f/2 turn into a 60mm equiv. lens and the 18-55mm turns into a 50-150mm


+1, something doesn't mesh here. If the camera is supposed to compete with the GH4, then the sensor would probably have to be larger than 1". The camera being described sounds more like competition for the GoPro. If it uses a 1" sensor, then a new lens mount or maybe a fixed lens would probably be required.

My guess: The sensor size is APS-C not 1" and the camera is tiny but still uses an M-mount. Canon simultaneously introduces a couple pancake primes in appropriate focal lengths.


----------



## roxics (Dec 15, 2014)

If it has a 1" senor and no interchangable lenses, then it isn't a competitor to the GH4.


----------



## andrewflo (Dec 15, 2014)

roxics said:


> If it has a 1" senor and no interchangable lenses, then it isn't a competitor to the GH4.



This is very true. I got excited by the headlines but immediately disappointed when I read 1" sensor.

But think of the positive: If Canon is getting closer to the 4K consumer level territory, then maybe they can introduce solid 1080p in their DSLRs or even 4k by 2020.


----------



## hoodlum (Dec 15, 2014)

andrewflo said:


> roxics said:
> 
> 
> > If it has a 1" senor and no interchangable lenses, then it isn't a competitor to the GH4.
> ...



The difference is that Canon is getting the 1" sensor from Sony while the DSLR sensors are in-house. Canon's sensor design is still the limiting factor as you need faster readout for 4k video and this is where Sony still has a large lead.

What Canon is able to do with the 1" sensor has no bearing on what they can do with their DSLRs.


----------



## slclick (Dec 15, 2014)

That mockup is fuglier than my EOS 5!


----------



## Jane (Dec 15, 2014)

With a couple of pros I know touting the virtues of micro 4/3 (MFT), I bought a Lumix GH4 and a set of fine lenses this past summer. It's a great camera, light, flexible and produces great results. I used it almost exclusively on a 3-week trip in Central Asia and I only had one lens at the time. What's more it's fun to use. Many of us are tired of lugging around the big heavy gear. Now, I still have lots of Canon high-end gear. Can't beat it for wildlife but Lumix is catching up. When we go on wildlife trips, the GH4 is my husband's video camera and serves as my backup. When we go on non-wildlife trips, the GH4 system is my primary (we don't usually shoot video of non-moving subjects). Canon has a way to go to catch Lumix. I hope they join the MFT group. The more competition the better.


----------



## baervan (Dec 15, 2014)

This baffles me, why they dont use a system they already have, meaning the EOS-M?

Make a high end mirrorless with the M system, you have already lenses for it. Make more! Pancakes! Fast zooms!

Plus it's the cinematic format that pros really really like. Slap a 4k here, zebras there, good codecs and its done. Swively screen and videographers will like it more. EVF and you'll win over also photo takers.

Without mentioning that there is a squadron of canon uses drooling for a pro mirrorless and just cant let go of their gear for a gh4 or a sony AND you make current M users happy too.

Again, baffled. C'mon.


----------



## ahsanford (Dec 15, 2014)

baervan said:


> This baffles me, why they dont use a system they already have, meaning the EOS-M?
> 
> Make a high end mirrorless with the M system, you have already lenses for it. Make more! Pancakes! Fast zooms!
> 
> ...



This is a total yawn until I saw "1 inch sensor" and a thought that this might have a lens mount. 

If Canon offers a _fourth_ lens mount (when EF-M is currently starving for high quality glass) for what appears to be some smash-and-grab 4K video response crossed with a drone opportunity, I will formally give up on ever owning a Canon mirrorless setup. 

Agree that EOS-M and more EF-M lenses are a better solution than what this rumor proposes. If not that, surely a fixed (non-modular) zoom lens is the easier way to go here, right? 

- A


----------



## CarlMillerPhoto (Dec 15, 2014)

roxics said:


> If it has a 1" senor and no interchangable lenses, then it isn't a competitor to the GH4.



Exactly. It appears that Canon is trying to sneak into good standing with budget filmmakers by associating itself with Panasonic and the GH4. However, it's exceedingly easy for Canon to compete with the GH4 - all they need to do is make the 1Dc $2,000...but they won't.


----------



## ahsanford (Dec 15, 2014)

CarlMillerPhoto said:


> Exactly. It appears that Canon is trying to sneak into good standing with budget filmmakers by associating itself with Panasonic and the GH4. However, it's exceedingly easy for Canon to compete with the GH4 - all they need to do is make the 1Dc $2,000...but they won't.



I'm a stills guy, but videographers keep telling me that there's far more to a video rig than if 4K is / isn't included. Surely Canon's stubbornness to not offer 4K at lower price points comes with other features/codecs/options that the GH4 _doesn't_ have, right? (And, no: a high price is not a feature )

I recognize Canon's being foolish here, but is it a 'reasonable market segmentation' foolishness or a flat out Rome-is-burning / 'The Emperor is wearing no clothes' sort of foolishness? Is this like Mercedes deciding to never sell an affordable car _but at least what they sell is really well built_, or has Honda (Panasonic) simply made a comprehensively better car (GH4) for less money?

I appreciate how disruptive the GH4 is, but is it truly better than its higher price point competition?

- A


----------



## CarlMillerPhoto (Dec 15, 2014)

ahsanford said:


> CarlMillerPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Exactly. It appears that Canon is trying to sneak into good standing with budget filmmakers by associating itself with Panasonic and the GH4. However, it's exceedingly easy for Canon to compete with the GH4 - all they need to do is make the 1Dc $2,000...but they won't.
> ...



The GH4 certainly has its limitations (mainly low-light), but the video hype is largely justified (and more than just about 4k). If one only compared video performance with the 1Dc, it would be a close call. The GH4 has all the features that are glaringly absent from non-Cinema line Canons: Peaking, Zebras, in-camera slo-mo, 1080p 60fps, 1080p 96fps, Synchro Scan, uncompressed 10 bit 4:2:2 out, XLR inputs with the YAGH interface unit...the list goes on and on. That's why the comparison is made to the 1dC and not the 5d Mark III, which is still more than twice its price. It's hard to justify paying $8,500 more than the GH4 for the 1Dc. However, I'm sure a full frame sensor, better low-light performance, and a native EF mount is worth it to some people. If I could have either camera for free, I would pick the 1Dc for those reasons. But right now it's just so overpriced to be competitive.


----------



## scottkinfw (Dec 15, 2014)

wake me up when there is an innovative 5D4, or 1DXII. Please make it mainly for stills with only a few more mp's. News from Canon has been a sleeper for so long now, it is like a drought.

sek


----------



## ewg963 (Dec 15, 2014)

scottkinfw said:


> wake me up when there is an innovative 5D4, or 1DXII. Please make it mainly for stills with only a few more mp's. News from Canon has been a sleeper for so long now, it is like a drought.
> 
> sek


+1


----------



## Tinky (Dec 15, 2014)

ahsanford said:


> If Canon offers a _fourth_ lens mount (when EF-M is currently starving for high quality glass) for what appears to be some smash-and-grab 4K video response crossed with a drone opportunity, I will formally give up on ever owning a Canon mirrorless setup.
> 
> Agree that EOS-M and more EF-M lenses are a better solution than what this rumor proposes. If not that, surely a fixed (non-modular) zoom lens is the easier way to go here, right?
> 
> - A



the m has access to various high quality systems. via the adaptor itis the most compatable camera canon make. add in those sigma arts, tokinas zeiss etc...

or do you want excruciately expensive bright brimes and telezooms that only fit the m.

the csc concept is great, but I think people need to acccept that if you want to get in closer than a medium telephoto and have bright apertures... you need a chunky lens, which canon already make.

I always saw the m as a compliment to the eos system, rather than a stand alone system (like say the pentax q, nikon v). 

Any csc with anything other than a pancake is no longer a csc... 

Just my take. I'm a great fan of the m camera, it has its limitations but so has every other bit of kit i've ever used in some way or other.


----------



## Etienne (Dec 15, 2014)

CarlMillerPhoto said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > CarlMillerPhoto said:
> ...



Low light performance is just happens to be the most important video feature, it is the one feature that can get you the shot or miss it. The GH4 is basically useless for video past ISO 1600, and not that great at 1600 either. The 5D3 gives great results up to about ISO 10,000 and with Magic Lantern you get zebras, peaking, magic zoom, and a ton of other goodies, so the GH4 doesn't cut it for me. The Sony A7s will be a great option when they get a good selection of native FF lenses, but Canon will probably have an offering before Sony gets the lenses made.


----------



## raptor3x (Dec 15, 2014)

Etienne said:


> Low light performance is just happens to be the most important video feature, it is the one feature that can get you the shot or miss it. The GH4 is basically useless for video past ISO 1600, and not that great at 1600 either. The 5D3 gives great results up to about ISO 10,000 and with Magic Lantern you get zebras, peaking, magic zoom, and a ton of other goodies, so the GH4 doesn't cut it for me. The Sony A7s will be a great option when they get a good selection of native FF lenses, but Canon will probably have an offering before Sony gets the lenses made.



Does anyone actually use the FE lenses for video? I would have thought that the way the manual focus rings are setup leaves them pretty much dead in the water for video.


----------



## ahsanford (Dec 15, 2014)

Tinky said:


> the m has access to various high quality systems. via the adaptor itis the most compatable camera canon make. add in those sigma arts, tokinas zeiss etc...
> 
> or do you want excruciately expensive bright brimes and telezooms that only fit the m.



I shoot stills with autofocus, so using MF lenses through an adapter is not going to do it for me. I want a high performing mirrorless system with reliable and quick autofocus, which means native EF-M lenses with USM focusing, either first party or possibly by Sigma.

Native EF-M lenses will also create the smallest aggregate mirrorless setup as compared to adapters or bolting on pickle-jar EF lenses.

There are tons of other options on this front, and Sony and Fuji have compelling offerings. But I don't mind waiting for CAnon to get it right here as (a) I _could_ adapt my EF glass (thus allowing an EOS-M to be a small second body) and (b) I prefer Canon ergonomics, menu system, build quality, etc. This isn't a screaming need for me so much as an opportunity I can wait for.

- A


----------



## pwp (Dec 15, 2014)

As someone who has relegated the 5D MkIII to strictly stills duty and is a very happy camper with a GH4 for video work, Canon could do a lot worse than targeting the amazing GH4 as a point of competition. 

-pw


----------



## PureClassA (Dec 15, 2014)

Etienne said:


> CarlMillerPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > ahsanford said:
> ...



Aaaaand that's why I wait for the Sony a7sII ... likely adding the 3-5 axis sensor stabilization and maybe fix that rolling shutter issue. I could care less what glass Sony makes for it. Hello metabones and Canon EF glass.


----------



## dbyolton (Dec 15, 2014)

If Canon really wanted to get into the mirrorless game, they should just adopt Micro 4/3. They certainly can turn out better glass than Olympus or Panasonic, and they have better color management expertise. They should go all in and abandon the ES-M lens mount.


----------



## hachu21 (Dec 15, 2014)

I think canon is going "affordable 4k" with 1" sony sensor because... they have no other choice!
Their APSC sensor tech can't manage the readout speed needed for 4k. Even the 7D II doesn't have a full sensor readout for 1080p. (And the famous dualpixel AF is disabled when you shoot in 60/50p...).

Don't know the tech they're using in the C line cams, but it must be quite different than their APSC DSLR.


----------



## CarlMillerPhoto (Dec 15, 2014)

Etienne said:


> CarlMillerPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > ahsanford said:
> ...



I use to think high ISO was super important, but then I learned how to light things. Now I think anything clean over 3,200 is nice, but not necessary. Maybe if all one has is a kit lens at f/5.6 I can see the importance. 

Also, don't forget that a Speedbooster on the GH4 gives you both a Super35 (~APS-C) FOV AND an extra stop of light. When other cameras need ISO 3,200 for a given scene, the GH4 with Speedbooster will give you the same exposure at ISO 1,600. And that combo is still $400 cheaper than the A7s and $1000 cheaper than the Mark III.

And the A7s can mount any type of glass in the world. Not sure why you'd hold out for native Sony glass....


----------



## mkabi (Dec 16, 2014)

Etienne said:


> Low light performance is just happens to be the most important video feature, it is the one feature that can get you the shot or miss it. The GH4 is basically useless for video past ISO 1600, and not that great at 1600 either. The 5D3 gives great results up to about ISO 10,000 and with Magic Lantern you get zebras, peaking, magic zoom, and a ton of other goodies, so the GH4 doesn't cut it for me. The Sony A7s will be a great option when they get a good selection of native FF lenses, but Canon will probably have an offering before Sony gets the lenses made.



+1
Also, is there DOF on the Gh4 without the speedbooster? Just curious.



PureClassA said:


> Aaaaand that's why I wait for the Sony a7sII ... likely adding the 3-5 axis sensor stabilization and maybe fix that rolling shutter issue. I could care less what glass Sony makes for it. Hello metabones and Canon EF glass.



+2

I wasn't too keen with mark 1, but that 5-axis man...
In fact, add 1080/120 and you have gold... pure gold 



CarlMillerPhoto said:


> I use to think high ISO was super important, but *then I learned how to light things*. Now I think anything clean over 3,200 is nice, but not necessary. Maybe if all one has is a kit lens at f/5.6 I can see the importance.
> 
> Also, don't forget that a Speedbooster on the GH4 gives you both a Super35 (~APS-C) FOV AND an extra stop of light. When other cameras need ISO 3,200 for a given scene, the GH4 with Speedbooster will give you the same exposure at ISO 1,600. And that combo is still $400 cheaper than the A7s and $1000 cheaper than the Mark III.
> 
> And the A7s can mount any type of glass in the world. Not sure why you'd hold out for native Sony glass....



+3

Yeah, but just to add... with regards to lighting... its a drag to lug around a generator all the time (if you are outside). And, if you're talking about battery LEDs... those sony batteries are expensive!

I'm hearing a lot good things about that speedbooster, never thought it can do super 35 FOV...
I have a friend who got the speedbooster with the Sigma 18-35 1.8 (turned it into 1.2 - Have you ever heard a zoom with 1.2???)


----------



## CarlMillerPhoto (Dec 16, 2014)

mkabi said:


> I have a friend who got the speedbooster with the Sigma 18-35 1.8 (turned it into 1.2 - Have you ever heard a zoom with 1.2???)



I know it's really quite amazing. That combo right there is a very large incentive to get the GH4. And the best part is (in my opinion) that while you get the f/1.2 exposure, you're not having to deal with a FF f/1.2 DOF equivalence. It's more akin to f/2 on FF, which helps keep things in focus.


----------



## Lawliet (Dec 16, 2014)

mkabi said:


> Yeah, but just to add... with regards to lighting... its a drag to lug around a generator all the time (if you are outside). And, if you're talking about battery LEDs... those sony batteries are expensive!



Those Dedolights run nicely off a car battery or its NiMH/ lithium(preferably iron phosphate) counterpart. And you get output on par with an ace in a package the size of a monolight. 8)


----------



## D.Lee (Dec 16, 2014)

Canon already has the perfect platform to go head to head against the Lumix GH4, Sony A7II, and the Samsung NX1. It’s the SL1, which is actually smaller and lighter than the other three and sports an actual optical viewfinder. The current SL1 is less than half the cost of the Sony and Lumix and about a third of the Samsung. NX1’s price, so there’s plenty of room to upgrade and still remain competitive in cost to the others. 

Canon just needs to spec it up with more MPX, faster FPS, 4K video, magnesium alloy body, water and dust resistance, fully articulated view screen, built in wi fi and they would have a winner on their hands.


----------



## Etienne (Dec 18, 2014)

raptor3x said:


> Etienne said:
> 
> 
> > Low light performance is just happens to be the most important video feature, it is the one feature that can get you the shot or miss it. The GH4 is basically useless for video past ISO 1600, and not that great at 1600 either. The 5D3 gives great results up to about ISO 10,000 and with Magic Lantern you get zebras, peaking, magic zoom, and a ton of other goodies, so the GH4 doesn't cut it for me. The Sony A7s will be a great option when they get a good selection of native FF lenses, but Canon will probably have an offering before Sony gets the lenses made.
> ...



Most EF lenses work fine, and lots of people use them for video. The 35 f/2 IS is great with IS and the focusing is very good, the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II is awesome, but it breathes quite a bit, the 24-105 is very good, and 16-35 is very good as well. The 100 2.8L IS macro is only useful for macro video (in my opinion), because it's very difficult to focus beyond a few feet away.


----------



## Etienne (Dec 18, 2014)

mkabi said:


> Etienne said:
> 
> 
> > Low light performance is just happens to be the most important video feature, it is the one feature that can get you the shot or miss it. The GH4 is basically useless for video past ISO 1600, and not that great at 1600 either. The 5D3 gives great results up to about ISO 10,000 and with Magic Lantern you get zebras, peaking, magic zoom, and a ton of other goodies, so the GH4 doesn't cut it for me. The Sony A7s will be a great option when they get a good selection of native FF lenses, but Canon will probably have an offering before Sony gets the lenses made.
> ...



All of those things are coming sooner than later.
If I was starting from scratch I might not go with Canon right now, but I don't see anything tempting enough to make me risk selling my and replacing it with another brand, especially since this is all a game of leapfrog and Canon is not sleeping. 

The 5D3 is still the best all around combo video/photo option I think: it does great low light for both video and photo, it has good AF for photos, lots of lenses, built like a tank, great ergonomics, has magic lantern. I am tempted a bit by the Sony A7s (although some say it's a bit fiddly), but I'll wait and see what they do with the mark II. In the meantime Canon may leap ahead. I am actually considering the C100 markII ... the new viewfinder and LCD look great, and that is a really useable camera. 

Some people love the GH4, but working alone in a variety of poorly lit environments where I can't control the lighting, it's just not going to do the job. The 5D3 can deliver great video without intruding on anyone or announcing itself with lights, the C100 even more so, and that's really important for documentary and ENG. 

I hope Sony updates the A7s with IS and beefier grip like the A7II ... that might be interesting!


----------



## mkabi (Dec 18, 2014)

Etienne said:


> All of those things are coming sooner than later.
> If I was starting from scratch I might not go with Canon right now, but I don't see anything tempting enough to make me risk selling my and replacing it with another brand, especially since this is all a game of leapfrog and Canon is not sleeping.
> 
> The 5D3 is still the best all around combo video/photo option I think: it does great low light for both video and photo, it has good AF for photos, lots of lenses, built like a tank, great ergonomics, has magic lantern. I am tempted a bit by the Sony A7s (although some say it's a bit fiddly), but I'll wait and see what they do with the mark II. In the meantime Canon may leap ahead. I am actually considering the C100 markII ... the new viewfinder and LCD look great, and that is a really useable camera.
> ...



+1
I'm not keen on replacing any of my gear either.
But, Sony is making it easy so that we don't have to... just body + adapter right?
It looks like Magic Lantern is already preloaded on it. Yet, I have to agree, current models are kinda "fiddly." 
Still... add that 5-axis and it makes every one of my primes into ISed lenses... who wouldn't want that? 
Only other problem is its only UHD and not true 4K, but they can upgrade that in the mark 2.
May be even add 2.5K @ 60p and 1080/240p?

You know whats funny, my cousin was asking about boxing day and the Nikon d610.
I told him that I don't know anything about Nikon, and that I'm a Canon guy myself, and that oddly enough... many people from both camps are looking at Sony a7 cameras and that he should seriously consider that as an option. I also told him that no matter which camera he chooses, on any side, there are going to be flaws that he has to learn to live with...


----------



## Tinky (Dec 19, 2014)

High Iso is important for video?

Hmmm. Helpful occasionally to get out a hole.

if we are speaking professionally, then fast lenses and lighting are much more desirable.

If thats too much hassle, them we aren't talking professionally. No offence whatsoever intended.


----------



## Etienne (Dec 19, 2014)

Tinky said:


> High Iso is important for video?
> 
> Hmmm. Helpful occasionally to get out a hole.
> 
> ...



Hmmm ... never heard of ENG, documentary, wedding work? Then you are just being arrogant. No offence whatsoever intended.

How can anyone be unaware of the importance of high ISO in both video and photography? Lighting is not always available, or even desirable. Even fast lenses are not always sufficient.


----------



## zim (Dec 19, 2014)

How do I work out how many minutes of video I can get into 1 GB of SD card space?

Regards


----------



## Tinky (Dec 19, 2014)

Etienne said:


> Hmmm ... never heard of ENG, documentary, wedding work? Then you are just being arrogant. No offence whatsoever intended.
> 
> How can anyone be unaware of the importance of high ISO in both video and photography? Lighting is not always available, or even desirable. Even fast lenses are not always sufficient.



I'm not unaware. High Iso is another tool. Where possible I'd rather light. High Iso is not a substitute for lighting, or more accurately, taking control of lighting.

My eng cam has a pag permenantly on top of it, I find the dichroic / daylight kens brilliant for adding a catchlight, even on a summers day.

I don't do weddings. So really don't care a jot about how they are shot, when I do event work, I'll have a pag or rotolights. Theres a set of reds in my car all the time for bouncing light into dark spaces. I've managed ti get by without isi 105,200 for 20 years. Granted an a7s would be handy fir shooting the Northern Lights once in a red green blue moon.

If you think high ISO first and lighting second then I'm quite happy for you to be the competition, and even happier that you think I'm arrogant.


----------



## mkabi (Dec 20, 2014)

zim said:


> How do I work out how many minutes of video I can get into 1 GB of SD card space?
> 
> Regards



Depends on resolution and/or framerate.
I believe 1080/24p is 12 min (plus/minus a few seconds) for 4Gb.
So about 3 min. per Gb.

Here is a t3i manual (go to page 151): http://gdlp01.c-wss.com/gds/0/0300004720/02/eosrt3i-eos600d-im2-c-en.pdf


----------



## Tinky (Dec 20, 2014)

mkabi said:


> zim said:
> 
> 
> > How do I work out how many minutes of video I can get into 1 GB of SD card space?
> ...



Also depends on the model of camera, if you have all-i or ipb temporal compression... it also depends on your subject, a detailed rapidly changing subject will use up slightly more memory than one where spatial and temporal savings can be made.

What kind if cam do you have?


----------



## zim (Dec 20, 2014)

mkabi said:


> zim said:
> 
> 
> > How do I work out how many minutes of video I can get into 1 GB of SD card space?
> ...



Cheers! But i was meaning for 4k off a 1" sensor

Is it as simple as 3mins x 0.27 ? (1080/4000)
Regards


----------



## Tinky (Dec 20, 2014)

too many curve balls here mate.

most manufacturers let you download a pdf of the manuals these days. For a definitive answer try that.


----------

