Next 4K camera?

Started Aug 27, 2014 | Discussions thread
Beach Bum Senior Member • Posts: 1,055
Re: True 4K vs pseudo 4K

Dheorl wrote:

Beach Bum wrote:

Dheorl wrote:

Beach Bum wrote:

Dheorl wrote:

Beach Bum wrote:

GoneMirrorless wrote:

Seriously looking at Fuji and Sony, but 4K caught my eye. My monitor is higher than 1080p resolution and I am saving for a new TV which may be 4K. The GH4 is pricey but looks good. I want an ILC. There is a wild rumor the M1 may get 4k. Are more 4k cameras coming?

If 4K is your thing, you should be careful about the onslaught of pseudo 4K that's going to be coming. By this, I mean 4K that has no better resolution than 1080p. It's simply a waste of resources to have to shoot and edit this. Plenty of smartphones shoot pseudo 4K, and it's eventually going to spread to the real cameras. You should especially watch out for 4K claims from other than Panasonic or Sony.

The only two consumer cameras with true 4K at this point are the Panasonic GH4 and the Sony AX100. Everything else is junk.

Canon have already made a fairly decent 4k camera. Only thing is I'm not sure if it will trickle down due to their determination to "protect" their own cinema line.

It wouldn't surprise me if Nikon suddenly came out from nowhere with something good either. There's been various rumblings about them working on a monster of a video SLR of some sort, could be interesting to see what comes of it.

Nikon has NEVER done anything good with video. EVER. And until I see some monster for them, I consider them to be complete dead wood on this front.

Canon doesn't do anything good at a price point that the typical consumer buys. And even with cameras like the 5D3, it's almost strictly only for pros due to the poor contrast autofocus.

I'll say it again. It's really a two horse race, Panasonic and Sony, until someone else gets of their ass.

I kinda think you missed what I was trying to say but tbh you don't seem like you'd listen even if I tried to explain myself. Oh well.

Go ahead. If I missed your point, then please explain it.

My point is that I've been waiting for CaNikon to do anything I want in video for several years now. It's just one disappointment after another from these two, but especially Nikon.

Canon seems to respond somewhat whenever Panasonic or Sony come out with some innovation, but it's usually significantly crippled in some way and often doesn't match up at all to the other two. In other words, they just ride their name and make stuff that's "good enough" not to impact sales.

Well purely by dint of the fact that Canon have done a 4K camera I would have said they are equal in that respect with Sony. The only 4K to come from sony so far has been far from spectacular IMO. Canon easily have the potential, I just don't think they'll use it much in consumer products because they have their cine line to look after. I'd hardly say autofocus is a reason to rule it out. From what I hear the autofocus on the 70D and now C100 is very respectable, and tbh I wouldn't call Panasonic or Sony's autofocus particularly usable for video either.

Sony has the AX100, which was actually the first true 4K camera for the consumer market. And I would call it spectacular. It really does have amazingly good video quality.

And Sony has been much better at video than Canon since well before the 4K revolution started. Their camcorder line has always been better than Canon. Let's not discount cameras like the RX100 (all three versions) and RX10, which are actually quite good for video. Amazing low light capabilities in these small cameras. I know people who use these more for video than stills. And last but not least, both Panasonic and Sony have always had better video capabilities in their entire still camera lineup than Canon, by quite a significant margin.

The Canon 70D does have excellent video autofocus (PDAF) but poor video quality. For everything else, Canon uses contrast autofocus. And FWIW, even if you don't believe that Panasonic and Sony are spectacular on this front, they're both light years ahead of Canon on this front. Canon has always sucked at contrast AF.

I fully admit Nikon hasn't done much with video. I don't think it's that bad (leagues ahead of olympus and fuji IMO). I do however think they definitely have the ability to bring something out the bag, definitely more than the other two just mentioned.

I would put Nikon and Olympus on par. With the IBIS on the E-M1, I don't see anything from Nikon being better than this, TBH.

I still think of these two, Olympus is the more likely to try new things. I view Nikon as old and stodgy and unwilling to try new things. Oly, having a lesser market share of the camera market, is more apt to experiment. It was the same with their 5-axis IBIS. They need something to differentiate themselves.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow