EF to m4/3 Speedbooster would be the way to go, help counter the small sensor.

If such a device existed it would be great but while there is an EF to NEX Speed Booster & Minolta MD to MFT Speed Booster there is no EF to MFT Speed Booster.

The GH4 has peaking and zebras. Biggest draw back for me is no 4:2:2 in camera. I am trying to stay light weight so external recorder is out. But if it comes in priced under $1500 I will probably buy one.

The G6 has peaking & it's pretty useless & nothing at all like peaking on a proper camcorder. The GH3 like the G6 already has crude zebras but again they are not a patch on zebras in a proper video camera.

...once my budget allows it the gh4 will probably be the next step, with or without flaws

I agree 100%, Noa. At the prices we've started to see in Europe - upgrading is a no-brainer for GH3 owners, if only for the focus peaking.

I am not ecstatic over the in-camera 8-bit, but DCI-standard 8-bit 4K will be better than my GH3's 8-bit 1080p. And then there's the 1080p overcranking...


Why didn't they take the guts of the GH4 & put it in a proper camcorder body with ND filters, dual card slots etc as a replacement for AF100?

Good poker players and stock traders ride winners and cut their losses on losers. Smart businesses look at sales figures and do the same thing.

Not to say they won't upgrade the AF100 at some point, but the consumer division has the momentum right now.

Cheers,

Bill
Hybrid Camera Revolution (http://hybridcamerarevolution.blogspot.com)

The whole camera could be more ergonomic to videographers. Why didn't they take the guts of the GH4 & put it in a proper camcorder body with ND filters, dual card slots etc as a replacement for AF100?

You should probably thank the fanboys for not getting that :) All joking aside, there still might be a af100 replacement coming up, I would be surprised if Panasonic would give up this model in favor of the gh4 formfactor.

You should probably thank the fanboys for not getting that :) ....

There's actually some truth to that. I spent 30 years in product development of a large technology company. I've seen this movie many times. Even tho it's the proper form factor for those who know and it's what videographers want, an upgraded AF100 will negatively impact GH3/4 sales. This gives the GH3/4 stills product people power over the AF100 (when was the last time Jan from Panasonic broadcast posted here? ANSWER: March 2012.

In the big picture, this is Panasonic's to lose and will take a gutsy executive to make it happen. Sony and Canon have their more expensive FS and C cinema cameras to protect so the FS100 and C100 will remain crippled. Panasonic doesn't have more expensive cameras to protect; only the GH3/4.

A new Panny AF100 has the potential to be the only low end Cinema camera with ND, good LCD, good VF, 50MBS recording and 422 Codec. These are the things people refer to as crippled aspects of the FS100 and C100. A new AF100 would take sales from FS100 and C100 as well as GH. The low end cinema market segment is theirs to take. But as long as the GH stills people have the revenue power, customer surveys and customer satisfaction numbers, they'll keep the AF people down and milk the GH line for revenue (ergo minimal firmware updates). After a year from release, this is all you got in the 1.2 firmware [insert sound of twirling finger]:
1) "Low Light AF" is added that makes it possible to set focus on the subject in low-lit situations (-3EV).
2) "Silent Mode" is added which suppresses electronic shutter, shutter sound, operation sound and flash emission with a single setting.
3) "Exposure Comp. Reset" is added which resets the setting of exposure compensation to ±0 whenever the camera is turned off or the shooting mode is changed.
4) Performance of AF is enhanced in use with H-PS14042 and H-PS45175.
5) Connection problem with Apple Mac computers via Wi-Fi is fixed.

Not even a fix that lets you stop recording over wifi (you can only start it and let it run on a timer). What a joke. From my read, everyone fed up with using DSLRs for video are going to the C100. If Canon upgrade the CODEC, it'll hit GH and FS100 sales hard; except for the fanboys. :-)

Jan Crittenden now works more in Sales, rather than product development, for Panasonic. This may be why you don't hear from her on these forums anymore.

Does anyone know yet from any of the new reports if the 10 second disappearing information problem is still there? The consensus was they did that because they were worried about "burn in" with the OLED displays. Still has the OLED displays, supposedly better ones. Or if it is no longer an issue maybe that was BS in the first place. Zebras would not be a problem in that scenario.

For me Im looking forward to seeing how a good 4k framegrab from the gh4 will print to a 10x8 inch photo.
Thats a real world application for 4k (the pixel dimensions of the gh4 4k footage translates to approx 12 1/2 inches by 7 1/2 inches at 300dpi)
I would love 4k video from a fullframe camera for this reason but the canon 1dc is out of my pricerange.
This could force the price of the 1dc down a bit though.
I think 4K on the 1D C is a 1.3x crop of the full frame sensor.

Does anyone know yet from any of the new reports if the 10 second disappearing information problem is still there? The consensus was they did that because they were worried about "burn in" with the OLED displays. Still has the OLED displays, supposedly better ones. Or if it is no longer an issue maybe that was BS in the first place.
Burn in may be a big problem if it happens on a proper display device such as a plasma TV - but so what in a camera monitor?

The purpose of such is solely to aid viewfinding and control - not for "proper" viewing. It seems pointless to protect it from burn in (assuming that is the case) if it negatively impacts it's main function! A bit like having a high performance car and never driving it above 50mph in order to keep the tyre wear down......

If there's burn in, the LCD is not fit for purpose. Shame on Panasonic. Stills camera designers at play.

Burn in may be a big problem if it happens on a proper display device such as a plasma TV - but so what in a camera monitor?

If there's burn in, the LCD is not fit for purpose. Shame on Panasonic. Stills camera designers at play.

Les: That's a mighty big if. To quote the incomparable George C. Scott from Kubrick's Dr. Strangelove, "I'd like to hold off judgement on a thing like that until all the facts are in."

David: It *was* a big problem, but that's from a very long time ago. One of the main reasons why I bought the Panasonic PZ850 (mentioned earlier in this thread) was due to the fact that the issue of burn-in on a plasma set by the 2008 generation was practically non-existent. I didn't have to bother with a break-in period, and now, years later, there's never been the slightest hint of it.

My post was too concise. This issue was discussed elsewhere early last year and if memory serves, someone claimed a Panasonic marketing person responded to the criticism of the 10 second displays with the line that it was to prevent burn in.

If burn in is the problem, then to David heath's point they chose a part that isn't fit for purpose. It's not a TV, it's a camera.

If burn in isn't an issue, then why not fix it in the next firmware release (there's been two).

If they don't fix the single most complained about flaw (a seemingly incredibly simple thing to do) then (to my point) they really don't care about customer satisfaction and have a naive implementation for video.

Jan Crittenden now works more in Sales, rather than product development, for Panasonic. This may be why you don't hear from her on these forums anymore.

Yes, another bit of evidence the product team was dismantled and the AF100 simply being milked for what it can return on the initial investment.

Based on the GH4K's features I wouldn't doubt at all if Jan Crittenden had some input to its development.

I think 4K on the 1D C is a 1.3x crop of the full frame sensor.

Yes, you are correct.

-- peer

OLEDs have been used by Sony in some of their cameras for the last couple of years. They don't time out and they don't suffer from burn-in. It would seem odd to me that Panasonic is doing that out of fear of burn-in.

I think 4K on the 1D C is a 1.3x crop of the full frame sensor.


Good info. Didn't realise that. We have a way to go yet but getting closer to >4k raw video from a full frame sensor. That'll turn the event industry on its head for sure.

If burn in is the problem, then to David heath's point they chose a part that isn't fit for purpose. It's not a TV, it's a camera.
The point I was trying to make is that whether or not there's burn in (and I'm quite happy to go along with Chris that it's largely something of the past) then what's the problem in *a camera viewfinder*? OK, if it did burn in a bit, so what? Better that than having a negative effect on ability.

Which leads towards the conclusion that the issue has nothing to do with burn in. A] It's not likely in the first place. B] So what if it did?

Interesting Panasonic GH4 presentation https://www.dropbox.com/s/cn0rev9fy5...esentation.pdf

Hi Mark

Think the link didn't copy and paste correctly so posted it again here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/cn0rev9fy5kumfv/GH4_Presentation.pdf

Interesting PDF, I think the only thing though it did confirm for me was the sensor uses pixel binning rather than line skipping when recording video.

Regards

Phil

Interesting Panasonic GH4 presentation https://www.dropbox.com/s/cn0rev9fy5...esentation.pdf

Link has now been taken down. Sorry that I didn't save the .pdf.

Wish I could train you guys into uploading .PDF attachments to this site.

Call me old fashioned, I guess, but whenever I find something interesting via DropBox (or similar), I always right-click and "save as," and from that point it's just a matter of clicking "manage attachments" in the post reply box here on the forum.

Here is another link to it http://www.personal-view.com/logo/GH4_Presentation.pdf

Thanks for uploading it, Mark!

Two important points from this slideshow:

1. The battery life is worse on the GH4 than the GH3. (540 on the GH3 vs 500 on the GH4)

and

2. The AC adapter notes a 4K/60p mode for the interface module.

Could it be that this little thing can actually pull off 4K/60p via 4x3G-SDI?

The point I was trying to make is that whether or not there's burn in (and I'm quite happy to go along with Chris that it's largely something of the past) then what's the problem in *a camera viewfinder*? OK, if it did burn in a bit, so what? Better that than having a negative effect on ability.

Which leads towards the conclusion that the issue has nothing to do with burn in. A] It's not likely in the first place. B] So what if it did?

Yes, I took it one step further. A competent designer would conclude B). After concluding that and quality testing still failed the part due to burn in, then the part isn't fit for purpose. Conclusions left to the reader....

The fact that the screen info disappears after a few seconds and that you can't change that behavior if you wanted is pain for many users for sure and a weird functionality decision by Panasonic, I"m sure a simple firmware update could have fixed this. I don't find it much of an issue as I prefer a clean screen while recording and I can get the screen info back when needed but I can imagine that for many others, depending on what type of monitoring you do (like audiolevels) it can be a critical flaw.

Now for the reason why there are more then one reason found back so it's some guessing what the real reason was, one reason I found back was: "The display loses info in order to save battery power." and teh second reason I found back was: "Since OLED TV is made from organic LED material there may be burn in issues, though not as bad as the first plasma displays."

Has it been confirmed that the gh4 has the same problem?

Overall the specs of GH4 is impressive.I wish if there is 2 versions of this camera.
One with 4K capable @ the already announced price and a stripped down version
with 1080p only with an upgrade option to 4K to future proof @ a lesser price
would have attracted many. This is the marketing strategy adopted in Arri Amira
though it is 2K only.

Rajiv

Hi

The fact that the screen info disappears after a few seconds and that you can't change that behavior if you wanted is pain for many users for sure and a weird functionality decision by Panasonic, I"m sure a simple firmware update could have fixed this. I don't find it much of an issue as I prefer a clean screen while recording and I can get the screen info back when needed but I can imagine that for many others, depending on what type of monitoring you do (like audiolevels) it can be a critical flaw.

Now for the reason why there are more then one reason found back so it's some guessing what the real reason was, one reason I found back was: "The display loses info in order to save battery power." and teh second reason I found back was: "Since OLED TV is made from organic LED material there may be burn in issues, though not as bad as the first plasma displays."

Has it been confirmed that the gh4 has the same problem?

Sort of related to burn in, OLED doesn't age too well. The main problem is with the Blue pixels, these age much faster than green or red, and is often why they are bigger, to try and balance this out.

Usually with non-critical devices the OLED screen is biased towards blue, then as blue ages and becomes dimmer the screen transitions towards being yellow. Starting it much more blue, it takes longer before this becomes an unpleasant yellowing. As people we are conditioned mainly by marketing that a bluer white is a whiter white, so we don't object to the blue bias nearly as much as we do the yellow.

With something much more colour critical like a camera you can't really do this bias as much, so the next option is to just ensure the screen isn't on for long periods.

Incidentally this is the main problem with OLED TVs and getting their lifespan up to an expected level. I'd rather stick with LCD.

Things improve all the time so hopefully they have lifted this restriction on the GH4.

Regards

Phil

Phil, I think they've largely overcome that problem with OLEDs. It was a problem a couple of years ago, but not so much today. Sony has been using them for a couple of years and I haven't read a single report of premature OLED wear.

Aside from that, the amount of wear an OLED would get in a camera wouldn't be nearly the amount that an OLED TV would see. So I doubt this is much of an issue.

Very interesting report from Eduardo Angel, who is shooting with a preproduction copy of the Panasonic GH4 (http://www.adorama.com/IPCDMCGH4.html/?KBID=68009) (firmware version 0.3): 7 things we discovered after shooting 4K with the GH4. You won't like #4. – Eduardo Angel (http://www.eduardoangel.com/2014/02/13/7-things-we-discovered-after-shooting-4k-with-the-gh4/)

Still planning to buy one, but those dadgummed microP2 cards are going to be expensive.

You 'think' they have fixed the problems. What makes you think that?

Two of the biggest problems with OLED displays remain, one is their life-span as blue OLED pixels age much faster causing a colour shift. Second is 'burn in' (related to the short life-span) on the display which hasn't been solved either, there are many complaints of burn-in on mobile devices which have displays used much less than TVs! Just Google "AMOLED burn in" then view 'Images'.

Do you have any evidence Ken that OLED issues have been resolved?

Regards

Phil

Agreed. I think this is the reason my Samsung Galaxy S4's screen, pentile AMOLED, has noticeable yellow cast after a year of moderate use (screen on and off during daytime standby and usage and completely off 6-8 hours every day at night). I've also seen a similar problem with the rear OLED screen on my 3 years old Sony Cybershot DSC-TX100V. Same problem with the king of cell phone stills shooter, the Nokia 808 Pureview as well.

You 'think' they have fixed the problems. What makes you think that?

Two of the biggest problems with OLED displays remain, one is their life-span as blue OLED pixels age much faster causing a colour shift. Second is 'burn in' (related to the short life-span) on the display which hasn't been solved either, there are many complaints of burn-in on mobile devices which have displays used much less than TVs! Just Google "AMOLED burn in" then view 'Images'.

Do you have any evidence Ken that OLED issues have been resolved?

Regards

Phil

My own experience with Samsung and Sony OLEDs on mobile devices as well as cameras and the overwhelming anecdotal reports Phil. Also keep in mind that mobile device usage will be far far higher than OLED camera use and therefore 'wear' will be considerably less. These were issues that were more common earlier. Of course this hasn't impacted the cost of producing OLEDs, as they still remain expensive and near prohibitive in large screen displays because of the high rejection rate during production.

But the problems you mention are just not prevalent any longer. Of course you can always read about people complaining about burn-in on many display types. Did you know there are even reports of 'burn-in' on LCD/LEDs? The point is they are few and far between. To this day, many people confuse burn-in (permanent) with image retention (IR...temporary).

Ken, facts are Panasonic have on previous cameras added a short time out to the OLED display to remove icons, that was never addressed by a firmware update despite calls for it to be. We can only conclude therefore it was by design to prevent burn-in. Your own experience is also anecdotal of course.

Facts are OLED displays have a short lifespan and burn-in issues and nothing has changed in the technology recently, and these issues are industry knowledge.

The GH3 manual has this information:

Monitor/viewfinder of this unit adopts OLED. Screen burn-in may occur on the screen/
viewfinder when a same image is displayed for a long period of time, but it does not affect the
recorded images.

The thread here discussed a few theories as to why the short time out might exist based on shared knowledge about OLED displays. No one knows the real reason why the short time outs exist, and most likely a combination of all factors discussed. We also don't know if the same time-outs exist on the GH4 yet. It would have ideal if the GH4 came with a separate standard LCD display to show setting information, or they just used a TFT LCD display rather than OLED then burn-in problems are avoided.

As for time usage of the display, well that depends on the individual. If the camera is used for video recording by a enthusiast or used professionally or semi-professionally, the display may be in use for many hours a day, easily exceeding that of a typical mobile phone, and burn in of on-screen icons is a possibility if they remained on screen all the time.

Regards

Phil

Ken, facts are Panasonic have on previous cameras added a short time out to the OLED display to remove icons, that was never addressed by a firmware update despite calls for it to be. We can only conclude therefore it was by design to prevent burn-in.

We can? There are other possibilities Phil, there really are. If burn-in is the reason, why is that other manufacturers are not imposing these time limits while using OLED displays? Are the other guys using better tech OLEDs that aren't as susceptible? Is Panasonic using older tech in these OLEDs? Burn in and limited life span was an issue in the past, but as can be seen from actual production OLED TVs, it is not. In fact, companies like Samsung & LG are promising long life from their OLED TVs. I don't recall the number of hours, but I believe they were comparable to plasma TVs.

Facts are OLED displays have a short lifespan and burn-in issues and nothing has changed in the technology recently, and these issues are industry knowledge.
Again, I believe you are using information that was true in the past. Samsung & LG have proved otherwise.


The thread here discussed a few theories as to why the short time out might exist based on shared knowledge about OLED displays. No one knows the real reason why the short time outs exist, and most likely a combination of all factors discussed. We also don't know if the same time-outs exist on the GH4 yet. It would have ideal if the GH4 came with a separate standard LCD display to show setting information, or they just used a TFT LCD display rather than OLED then burn-in problems are avoided.

And that's the truth. We don't know if Panasonic will have that time out in the GH4. We don't know the real reason for why it existed or may still exist. If you've worked with OLED VFs as opposed to the traditional LCDs, you'd see why OLEDs are much better...at least IMO. Better color, less lag etc.

Panasonic did make the right move by externalizing the audio meters, but requiring an XLR 12v to use it defeats it's purpose. A battery grip with audio meters, TC display and XLRs powered by another battery in the grip would be the solution. Also, add a full sized HDMI to that and it'd be a way better alternative to the clunky XLR power locked expansion.

^^^ Yes, "IF" 48V phantom power is required for one or both microphones running into the XLRs I would imagine it will eat the internal battery in NO time, requiring that module to be pulled off and on frequently. I kept looking for a place where it would take another battery like a grip would.

You really would be required to have one or more of those small phantom powering modules with 9 volt batteries, and the rechargeable lithium polymer batteries even at that. Alkaline 9Vs go really quick themselves for that purpose, if using the GH4 at 1080P in event work. If you're planning short production takes either at 1080P or 4K then not as much of a problem. I encountered this with alkalines in a Juiced Link mixer with only one mic being supplied, with its meters and all, first time I shot an event with the GH3.

Just reading up B&H's description of the 4K recording modes, and it looks like there's no pixel binning in 4K mode, which means you'll have a slight crop compared to 1080 mode. Will be interesting to see how the image is de-bayered in-camera.

Has anyone else seen an available date yet?

For the first time B&H is listing 'End of April 2014'.

this is a huge step in the right direction , for us. 4K is here to stay (remember the first HDV? look at those now). But the huge step is that we have a proper tool for serious production without all the limitations they all put to maintain the sales of the unbelievably expensive tools for the real thing. I admit that I wasn't expecting this so soon, a sign that things got out of control (since the D90): the technology was there but it was settled that the prosumer segment shouldn't get past the miniscule 1 third of an inch stuff, and dedicate the real stuff to you know who. And they work day and night to make sure that there will be enough limitations to keep the tools into that standard (poor). We (all) should build a monument to the guys who created the D90 (by mistake, the live view was intended for product still photography, not video, and maybe that's why the players didn't pay attention at that time)

this GH4 looks awesome, it has everything and we only need to dedicate ourselves to shoot good footage: no excuses now, we have the tool now.

My only thing is 60p. I'm willing to wait another year for 60p and HDMI 2.0, then I will move on to a GH5 from my EX1R.

Jack , sure , it's understandable
but you could do what I did going from the EX1 to the future with most of the good things that a real camcorder can offer, but with a bigger sensor (and that's the future in my opinion) : got the ea50 that shoots 60P (big difference shooting sports like I do compared to the EX1 @30P)
now the AX1 looks good but again those miniscule sensors ... it's cheap but I'm not sure about investing in those sensors anymore.
For now the ea50 is the best solution covering the gap between the DSLRs (GH3 inparticular) and the small sensors (obsolete) but with a (still primitive) servo , bust still "servo". Try the ea50, see how you like it. if you need SDI then the XA25 shoots a little better than my EX1 (by the way)
If you need a servo zoom and a real sensor then Sony is the only chance right now. Panasonic doesn't have the lenses yet (only the 45-175 and the 14-42 PZ , but those are two lenses... you can't sprint to change the lens if you need to zoom down from tele. LOL

If there's a EA50 4K reboot with XAVC-S, I'd be all over that if there's 60p.

I think lenses are the issue. My AX1 works better than I had thought. It's low light is not as sensitive as my NX5U but it is a lot less noisy, more like the NX30U. In good light it is great so unless all the shoots are in the dark it works just fine. It is also 60P as like Jack that is a must on any new cameras for me as well as a long servo zoom. Unlike most I want large depth of field not shallow so smaller sensors are just fine. The 1" would be a nice compromise in sensitivity so we will have to see what Sony comes out with after the FDR-AX100.

Ron Evans

If there's a EA50 4K reboot with XAVC-S, I'd be all over that if there's 60p.

yeah . but first we need to make Sony pro-sumer (and Canon pro-sumer, and Panasonic pro-sumer) change the mentality : the ea50 is a consumer camera (more consumer than pro-sumer), so doesn't deserve a good zoom (like the RX10 for example) and doesn't deserve a decent low light performance. Until they will change that mentality we're going to keep consuming ourselves with limitations over limitations while the dsrls, cell phones and pocket will keep surprising us. The entire consumer and pro-sumer segment is also changing fast : bokeh is done now with a 20mm lens , contrast is king now, sharpness is king , high definition and resolution is king. How are we going to compete against the kids posting on youtube part of the same event that we get paid to cover when their segments will look that much better? There is a gap (always been there actually) between the kids, us (small productions, weddings etc.) and broadcast (TV to be clear, not even considering the motion picture giants). and the gap is out of balance. the kids get better and better stuff, and diffuse like crazy on the net so our Clients can see it, then there are the big guys who get better stuff every other month and we are in the middle. But we are the guys who used to spend 7K a piece to produce. We do count. We need to catch up and they (Sony, Panasonic and Canon) are not helping as they should.

Well if you think the kids are producing better looking video you have to remember they are using devices with small sensors and in full automatic most the time. Either from cell phones or small cameras. No large sensors or fancy expensive lenses. I use my Sony Xperia T cellphone to shoot video of my granddaughter and as Jack often says it could be the same sensor as in my FDR-AX1 or my HX30V still camera!!. The lenses though are very different between these products. Either way it produces nice video or stills and very convenient !!! Maybe I will upgrade to the Z2 and shoot 4K to see how it compares to my AX1 !!!

Ron Evans

Ron,
yes .. but come on.. seriously now: from the FX1 what progress has been achieved before the stratospherically expensive pro-sumer FS700? if it wasn't for the push of the D90 we'd be shooting with XL1-like expensive miniscule sensors machines. But even right now the RX10 is a pocket camera with one of best zoom Ive ever seen. and it's a pocket camera. The 18-200 for ea50 cost like the whole RX10 with that best of a zoom. (I mean.. 2.8 all the way into a inch of a sensor, do be carried in your pocket.) and us? what about us? my EX1 looks like a VHS camera compared to that. I'm not saying that our tools should look better than the pocket or cell phones... but at least they should look the same, no? Like this is more like a joke for us. I can't compete with the ea50 against the pocket RX10, plain and simple : I don't have the smooth zoom in servo, I don't have that Zeiss look, I don't have that low light performance, I don't have that bokeh and on and on and on. That's the picture right now. Am I complaining? You bet, of course I am complaining. I feel that the D90 revolution made all the priorities upside down.

@Anthony -
Having watched a video suggesting that the RX10 has killed the videocam...

Are Camcorders Dead? - YouTube

I would agree with your feelings... everywhere you go, there is a bumper crop of phones, tablets and phablets, many of which shoot 1080p, and a new crop is right around the corner that will shoot 4K, with stabilization, and features to make stuff shot with them look more like they are more expensive cameras.

The old saying about the best camera being the one you have with you has turned the cell phone into the PRIMARY camera for most people, and at least some of them have decent quality sensors (for dinky ones), passable optics, and usable software... the rapid consumer release cycle (with consumer DEMANDS!) for phones and the aggressive competition dictates that there is a LOT of emphasis of features and actual "no-brainer" usability with quality results, including in bad light, and difficult capture situations.


Pros won't likely be seen shooting with cell phones most of the time (although it is possible), so there will be a market for "big cameras", and cell phones will continue with a 1-2 year upgrade cycle (the batteries wear down, and network upgrades force new phones on users...), meaning that more and more powerful cameras will be in people's pockets and purses (whether they know how to use them fully is another matter).

So yes, the "event shooter" is going to be squeezed out of the market, and the limited demand for semi-pro equipment is likely to continue to shrink, which has been happening for several years already... 3-5 years, and the P&S and handycam are likely to be quaint history...


@Ron -
This is the "scary" aspect of all the above... a cell phone/tablet shouldn't "in theory" be able to compete with a "real camera", either stills or video, but there they are. Sure, the quality is going to have weaknesses, but for many people, the flaws are simply not enough to negate the use for capturing CONTENT, which after all is the thing of value...

With our last cell upgrade a year ago, the camera became "passable" for my wife, and I think it looks "OK" for casual "snaps", I expect the next upgrade to be another jump in quality, and carrying a pocket camera may become unnecessary. I'll still carry an RX100M2 or equivalent, just because it shoots better quality for both stills and video, and an RX10 is now my "primary" shooter, again for stills and video. But I've been using the cell phone sometimes TOO!

Sony is trying to get out in front of this sea change - they supply cell phone/tablet imaging modules, they know those are selling in quantity while their P&S and handycam markets and lines & sales shrink. The RX series is trying to appeal to those that want better quality, with portability - and it's succeeding. Sticking that sensor and processor in the AX100 with 4K output is an obvious extension of the same technological advances..

Panasonic is going with the successful GH line, knowing that works, and appeals to professional/semi-pro shooters. ALL the manufacturers are probably scrambling to figure out what will sell in the future, the tech changes SO rapidly!.

Dave,
your post is one of those posts that should be saved and read it and read it again. I couldn't say it better.
but I don't have any problem with the pocket cameras being good. It's fine, we do what we do and deliver , the cell phone crowd play and post on youtube 3 min clips, we do something different. My problem is with Sony and the others. They keep limiting and investing energy making models perform bad to sell the next more expensive one. And they seem like don't see what's going on. How is it possible that a D90 was able to produce 10,000 times better than the pro-summers at that time? And still we have to deal with obsolete technology (EX3) and sub-par quality. Like I said before I don't ask to have tools better than a cell phone, but at least as good as a cell phone. Am I asking too much?

Back to the D90 that started everything I too had the chance to open my eyes but since I'm not smart I didn't see it : this is a real story happened several years ago. I was covering a concert with an FX1 (paid by the organization). MY girlfriend came along and brought her g9 (canon). Again it was way before the D90 and the live view revolution. She did something wrong and instead of stills she shot a 10 minutes movie (in 640x480 I believe or maybe 1024 I don't remember. When we got back home and I was mounting the footage she asked me to check her camera and I found the movie. Please listen to this, as it's important Dave: I had my footage in front of me and compared to the G9 stuff was miserable. The G9 was crisp, sharp, better, better ,better. let me say it again: BETTER. I didn't pay attention, but right there in front of me was the truth of the huge scheme. The technology was there BEFORE the D90 . (Sony makes the sensor for the D90), so they knew. Dave, do you see where I'm going with this? But it wasn't for us, was for the better payers (you know who). We kept their business swallowing absurd money for junk.
And now we still have to fight against the absurd limitations of a pro-sumer camera that doesn't even come close to the pocket RX10?

Sony Canon and Panasonic (JVC doesn't count because it's part of one of those three): do your job, stop limiting our cameras, produce the best you can instead of spending all your time counting the performance (poor) to sell the other ones. Because the rest of the offers don't do that and improve every day now.