jkoch2: 4.2.2 4k over HDMI to external recorder? This limits use to tripod and dolly shots with slow set-up and staged action for which there are already various dedicated studio cameras available.
More practical: 4.2.0 4k that records 4k internally to economical cards, with either 5-axis stabilization or gyro-based Balanced Optical Steadyshot. A large sensor is no help if it demands slow readout that aggravates rolling shutter. Any casual video shot in 4k will require a moderate depth of field, or else be marred by focus-hunting or missed focus. A 1/1.7" or three 1/2.3" sensors should be fine for that and produce less heat too. Built-in ND filters great too.
4k successors to the X920, PJ790, G6, GX7, LX7, or HX400 could offer this. Canon or Nikon could, too, but will probably wait 4-5 years. An RX100iii or RX10ii might also succeed, if only the stabilizers and (slow) read-outs improved to reduce jello and banding of hand-held shots that afflict the AX-100 with the same 1" sensor.
The PXW-Z100 is a shoulder-tote camera that shoots 4.2.2 4k. The $3.5k FDR-AX1 and $2k consumer AX100 offer XAVC-S 4k at lower costs. All allow internal 4k capture of some sort without need for an external recorder. The GH4 will also capture 4.2.0 internally. I need 4.2.2 about as much as I need an 18-wheel truck or a 50 meter pool stocked with hungry mermaids.
"Sling the recorder around your shoulders." Yeah, like a tuba, a chimpanzee, or a 1979-vintage Betacam.
Samsung may be less glacial. Meanwhile, 4k phones and POV gadgets will improve and possibly decimate the market before 4k cameras or camcorders appear.
4.2.2 4k over HDMI to external recorder? This limits use to tripod and dolly shots with slow set-up and staged action for which there are already various dedicated studio cameras available.
ABC: "It’s unclear if the shooter was an actual policeman or an insurgent dressed in police uniform."
Is there really much difference? Perhaps 60% of the hungry people that don the uniform are suspicious or resentful of foreigners, and probably worried how to survive if the Taliban win amnesty or elections. The other 39% may be kin or agents of the Taliban. The other 1% are well aware of the prospects and have sheltered their fortunes and families accordingly.
The shooter may have to spend a few weeks in detention, until the next hostage exchange, and reside in Pakistan a few months, before resuming his assaults or receiving promotion.
A sad event. But do we label "brave" what is entirely forseeable, avoidable, and fruitless? Alas, more condolences may be in store, since the situation seems more likely to get worse than better.
mpgxsvcd: What is crazy is that this camcorder is labeled as “Professional” because it sticks to the antiquated specs that broadcasters demand. However, cameras like the Panasonic GH4 are called “Toys” when they shoot 4k @ 30 FPS video with capabilities for high quality audio and 4:2:2 10 bit color.
Being “Professional” no longer means it is better. It just means that it meets a standard required for a specific job.
"Professional" usually means that the ports and plugs conform to the sorts of 60s-vintage cables and connections used in the broadcast world. SDI or even jumbo coaxial, but not USB3 or HDMI.
"Broadcast Standard" video spec is being superseded by newscasts based on video shot with phones at the scene of the event or action. The gear wagon that arrives 12 or 24 hours later will be used mainly to capture images of authorities claiming "everthing under control," or else placing blame on others--either of which are very tedious to watch.
Odd that Canon has not tried to offer a videocamera with internal gyro stabilization, which might be quite helpful for handheld shots, and better than conventional lens or sensor digital stabilization.
Peter K Burian: A lot of photographers wish Canon were spending time/money to develop new lenses for DSLRs instead. Like the LONG awaited replacement for the 100-400mm L zoom.
Is there really a huge demand for expensive video gear that's not already being met by Canon AND the many competing manufacturers? Just asking...
Canon reply: Have a nice day.
Simon Zeev: Nice camera, but for being a true diving camera seed to be water proof to 40m at last.
At depths of 40m, there usually isn't enough light or color to shoot good photos anyway. The strobes and supporting gear for serious shots at such depths cost, per diem, a great multiple of the price of a T3 or any other tool for occasional snorkeling or reef dives.
mpgxsvcd: Shooting without RAW underwater is a very difficult thing to do.
It helps to have a face mask and know how to swim. A snorkel or scuba can help. If the water is murky or the light low, RAW won't help. Nor will it help if 99.99% of users have no idea what RAW is. In good light and clear water, good on-board color filter or WB adjustment is enough. Most of your worries will be about salt water invading the seals after a few dives or after you open the chambers to charge the battery or swap the card. Sand, grit, or breakdown of the seals can bring eventual calamity.
mpgxsvcd: I would like to know more about the 120 FPS and 240 FPS modes.
My hunch is that they work OK if you have very good light and shoot without shaking or panning the camera a lot. The image stabilization probably can't function at such high frame rates.
Cane: Why can't they just give an equivalent zoom range instead of saying 24x zoom, or whatever? That marketing drives me insane.
What does "600mm equivalent" mean to the average buyer? Do you rank students or employees by raw scores or by percentile rankings?
Grobb: Just another pinhead 1/2.3", 16 MP sensor superzoom, next :/I would not trade my XZ-2 for it!Bring on a 1" sensor semi compact camera to compete with Sony and Canon!Give us a 24-120mm f2-4.0, very sharp lens, 3-axis IBIS, tilting touch screen and weather seal it. I'm looking forward to the rumored Fuji X30 or Nikon P8000.
You'd still stay with your XZ-2, unless the price for what you want were so low that Oly or the others could not make any money.
stevez: Not sure what Olympus is thinking here. Everything I read lately indicates that the compact camera market is dying. Perhaps super zooms are excluded from that? On the plus side, it might be a good camera for someone graduating from a phone camera.
Zoom and good image stabilization are the two areas where phone cameras lag. There is no certainty, however, that enough consumers will know or care. What is certain, however, is that sales of system cameras will never offset the loss of the P&S or compact markets. Can one fault Olympus for making a rear-guard effort to stave off complete shut-down of compact business?
Markol: These comments sound like those from 2009, except that now we do have several larger sensor compacts, so why complain? The target audience won't care and there is a large crowd wanting these travel zooms, believe it or not. And people should start understanding that with these dimensions and focal lengths, a large sensor is not yet possible.
An unless smart phones suddenly gain weight and get big bulges, most travelers will not buy or use any larger sensor products.
peevee1: Did not SH-50 claim 5-axis stabilization too? Seems SH-1 is SH-50 in new body with TruePic VII processor...
The SH-50 also has 5-axis stabilization. The question is whether the newer processor yields better results.
mpgxsvcd: If this was a Canon or Sony camera I would say that it would sell pretty well. However, it is an Olympus camera and their marketing isn’t nearly what their competitors is. This is just another run of the mill small sensor compact with an unreasonably long telephoto lens.
Sure it has some great features like the 5-axis IS, 120 FPS 720p, and Pen style design. However, its lens is just too slow at the long end. In all likelihood this won’t improve a novice users images over what they have right now.
I am still waiting for a better compact camera than the LX7 and RX100 II.
5-axis IBIS will help more than you think, and a long lens that works in good light sells beter than a fast-short one that will be bulky and still yield blur in low light. Any successors to the the LX7 nor the RX100 will either trade-off lens speed for length, or be like the RX10, which is much bigger and heavier. If all you want is a big sensor in a small body, you have the RX1.
Dvlee: Surprisingly, the Panasonic website does not offer any specifications.
Digging around, I learned that it has a sealed battery, USB charger input; built in mic, there does not seem to be an input for external mic.
What I would like to know is the optical specifications; focal length, zoom range, minimum focus distance, close up magnification, zoom and focus controls. The specs given above only say; Ultra wide angle up to 160dgs.
Looking at the video, I found the movements a little disturbing. ;sudden moves, tilted horizons, etc. One would have to learn to move ones head like a videographer. Same applies to using a Go Pro on a helmet mount. At least with a head mount you can take multiple views, hands free, and then edit the transitions out. But keeping horizon straight is a crapshoot because it might be hard to look at the monitor with a 160dg FoV.
The real potential with this camera is being able to squeeze it into tight places where even a Go Pro would not fit.
Look at a monitor instead of the vehicles, people, objects, or ravine you are about to crash into? An external mic could stick out of the helmet like a rhino horn or a Star Wars extra.
rfsIII: This sounds like the breakthrough we've been waiting for from the big camera companies.
Some employee at Canon or Nikon probably proposed multi-sensor cameras, instead of single large ones, years ago. The likely reply: "Can't do. Would challenge our DLSR and big lens business. Be careful or soon you'll get a pink slip."
High price = low score for "value." That might change, once the RX10ii with 4k video appears, and the RX10 price falls to $700.
Another reason why smart phones will survive and traditional cameras will die out. Authorities cannot possibly police everyone who appears to use a phone, even if some snap pictures.
Public opinion at large, not just in certain countries, holds casual public photography in contempt. It is on par with soul-snatching or humiliation of the subjects. Property owners fear they will be reported for code violation or illegal renting. Spouses, employees, or public functionaries fear photos will be used as evidence of misbehavior. An Iowa law makes unapproved photography of farm property a felony, since someone was taking pictures of migrant worker shanties, confined animals, or manure dumps and run-off.
Trouble, trouble, trouble. Ban cameras. Out of sight, out of mind. Or wink and nod.
Meanwhile, there is widespread support for official or owner video surveillance of public spaces, workplaces, and private property of any sort. Might makes right.