Andrew Reid

Original clip looks a bit too colourful as well. Was saturation -5 in-camera? Nice final grade, but was contrast at 0 or -5 in-camera? Should be at 0. Which camera - GH4?

Yes it's all in the guide that comes with your download. Enjoy shooting with it! LX100 still great and I did the same as you, re-bought one!

Answer. Yes.

Just tried the EOSHD Pro Color for Panasonic LUT in Affinity with a raw still from my GH4... works!

Can't fault Canon's lenses, although Sigma EF mount lenses are often better value for money. Fact remains you can't take mirrorless lenses to a different system, so you are stuck with them and have to sell all of them if a new camera from a different system takes your liking. To date I have used my Canon lenses on - Blackmagic Panasonic Sony Olympus Canon of course Fuji (although no IS, AF or aperture control) And with Speed Booster they're even better on crop sensors than the native glass. I only use native glass when I need the best AF speed for stills, or the lens is pretty special in its own right.

How far have the modern camera companies come from the founder of Panasonic and his business principals - http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/16225/konosuke-matsushita-principles A long way backwards by the looks of it!!

It just goes to show that some pros will say anything. Literally just bullshit misleading drivel to get a pay cheque. It's as if reality TV is the new advertising blueprint for Canon. To think this video now has over half a million views and a sales spike in 80D's because of it... All because some dick is prepared to bare face lie through a sponsored video so he can enrich himself. And it totally undermines what we're trying to do, passing knowledge between us on the forum, testing cameras, putting time and money into reviews without any support from Canon at all. They can all go and fuck themselves. The video is so cynical. I hope Canon's dumb pro customers who don't know better do what Scott DickWanker says he does.... selling all the pro Canon gear for an 80D! That would be funny. If Canon want to encourage this, they could have at least fixed the moire and aliasing on it!

It may be that they have even fixed it as S-Gamut is supposed to be a standard colour gamut and having footage shot with all kinds of differently tuned S-Gamuts probably confuses the hell out of professional colourists! The FS5 is the same as A6300. As is A6500. A7S II however we can still play

Thanks for using Pro Color on the video JazzBox. I see you had contrast -5 It would have looked better with the optimal settings in the guide, which have contrast at 0. When you set contrast to -5 it doesn't give you more dynamic range. It reduces the amount of tones between one colour and another = Less colour information in the end result even when you add contrast in post. This is EOSHD Pro Color for Panasonic with Contrast at 0 (optimal, as in guide): And this is at contrast -5 (see how the tones on the face are mashed together?):

Very interesting post Tim. The first part of it you describe is what I mean when I refer to "honesty". For me, honesty in editorial is about emphasis. You can emphasise the positive or the negative. When you take out the negative, readers switch off and they may as well read the manufacturer's website instead or the box. There's a new form of advertorial called a 'balanced review', which are actually 80% positive and 20% negative. That the negatives exist at all in these review is seemingly all they require for 'balance' and I've lost count of the number of times people have mistaken a glossy advertorial piece for a 'balanced review'. It's very easy to do. Likewise it's easy to mistake passion and genuine enthusiasm in the product, for selling too. There are camera reviewers that get accused of this a lot. In the end it comes down to a creative business model which doesn't compromise your content. The mission should be to say anything - even rude things (which often are entertaining and add colour to the debate over a camera) - without links to a manufacturer or PR people. There are not enough business models being tried where the reviewer is completely unattached to a manufacturer, and whenever they get big enough, out come the offers from the PR people to the reviewer in an attempt to get them to self-censor.

I totally agree. It's a bare faced lie in the video, all an act. Have we come to the point now where manufacturers have to lie to us to sell us a camera? The line between PR and editorial and advert has not just been blurred, they have brought the suspension of disbelief from the advertising world into some kind of 'reality' piece - which attempts to fool us even more. All this is severely backfiring on Canon, to the point where I may even consider selling my 1D X Mark II. I don't want to deal with unethical companies and it isn't the first time Canon has lied either. They did so to me via an official manager, when the 5D Mark III was originally released it only shot 720p via HDMI... they said the hardware wasn't capable of 1080p then 2 years later updated the firmware to enable it. Honesty is important.

Added it to the compatibility list. It should have been there in the first place but I forgot to add it. I went out and bought an LX100 again the other day as I am liking the results so much with the G85. LX100 is a little gem of a camera.

You can set it but it doesn't effect the image. Point it at something very red and you will see.

Yes poor Amazon owned DPReview. They must be really strapped for cash!

Maybe YouTube removed music from it on copyright grounds and they didn't contest it yet? And thanks kaylee for those GIFs... love it.

Hey Scott. This sums up quite well what I loved about DPReview's editorial and why I was so proud to be contributor for those years. I looked upon DPR as something of a leading light, the most respected review site for digital cameras, one of the first, and that's why I hold it to a higher standard than others. I care passionately enough about it to get upset and to shout about it when it goes wrong and I think it's in danger. DPR did go in-depth, especially on the technical side and still does. If the new advertising in the form of sponsored content also did this to the same standard, then the quality would remain and not hurt the brand as much but even then there's a problem, because it would only work as long as it was impartial, which advertising never is and never can be. Flick through an old fashion magazine from the 1970's and it is almost ALL advertising yet readers still bought it in droves.... you'll see a lot of high quality advertising, fantastic photos (David Bailey, Helmut Newton) and minimal words, minimal editorial pieces! I am not against advertising culture entirely or with zero tolerance of ads and I'm not a communist although I do live in Berlin The problem I have is that more and more the manufacturers seem to be the boss, the paymaster and the editors, if not directly then certainly in subliminally controlling ways like with the PR organised events and it is wrong that this appears to be our only choice as reviewers if we want to get our hands on new gear at the earliest opportunity. We join the hype train by doing this and we trade our credibility, or at least it looks that way for the readers. I am open for a civilised debate on what we can do in the industry to recover some integrity in what we do. There needs to be some collective action. So the PR companies and manufacturers are after our jobs Scott. And we are going to just let them take over on the content side? But their purpose, if sponsored, is to sell a camera. For me that is not the purpose of what we do. I hate this insidious influence. If we for example are to put out educational content for instance and it is paid for by Canon, then whichever manufacturer sponsors us the most or pays the most, the more content on that particular brand there will be, and there's yet another form of bias. Even if the content itself had zero bias, the money still control the agenda. It's our job to create excellent content that's worth watching, not Intel's. By taking their money, you are trading your position as a content creator with them and one day you will be without a job. Of course! I understand that and always have. That's because it's being traded in bit by bit. Your voice replaced by somebody else's. If it's only a 3% increase in ad revenue and you're owned by Amazon, why do it at all? Why take such a big risk with the brand for the sake of bowing to the manufacturers and 0.001% of their overall ad spend budget? Tell them to fuck off! Thanks for the message on here Scott, I do appreciate it. If I can ever mend my relationship with DPReview I would. I have friends there and the only bad words exchanged were with Barney and Simon Joinson. In the end the buck stops with them. If they are going to take the site in this direction, they know my opinion on how wrong this is and why it won't turn out the way they hoped. They have a responsibility as the senior figures to change tac. Their responsibility to the readers should come before their financial obligations to advertisers anyway, because without any readers there won't be any advertisers!

Like the Sony version of EOSHD Pro Color it is mainly designed to be used to fix colour straight out of the camera, on new material But as a bonus you can apply it to old material and it should fix the issues with that as well - but I don't offer guarantees of compatibility with absolutely all footage shot on an infinite array of different settings - that would be impossible, for example you could have the CineLikeV on +5 contrast or something crazy like that and it wouldn't give the same dynamic range as with the optimal settings in the guide, as the image data would just not be there in the first place. With EOSHD Pro Color you set the camera to the Standard photo style, leave contrast in the middle, leave white balance on automatic, then the LUT applies EOSHD Pro Color to the material in post the same with every shot and scene - no matter what the lighting is like. The usual suspects like CineLike-D don't look as good. Test it and you will see. Also dialling down the contrast too much in-camera doesn't work as well on Panasonic cameras as it does on Sony's, for a 'wide dynamic range'. It hurts the tonality of the image and reduces the amount of colour information on Lumix cameras. Unlike Sony's cameras there aren't enough advanced picture controls, colour modes and gamma modes on Panasonic's consumer cameras to dial in the EOSHD Pro Color look in-camera, so the LUT takes on the responsibility instead. This has the advantage that you can dial the look into existing footage, within reason, and it is literally just a few clicks in your edit. No messing. The EOSHD Pro Color LUT brings out so much shadow detail from the Standard profile, recovers the crushed blacks, recovers the clipped highlights - they are still there in the codec but for whatever reason aren't there when you view the files in your NLE or media player!! This fixes that and applies the new colour science which resembles the look of a Canon camera. The LUT also pays special attention to skin tones in particular, to get people looking more realistic and less dead. Existing footage - If you have old shoots and you want to re-grade, you can indeed try applying EOSHD Pro Color to these clips in your NLE. But you will need to tweak the basics - contrast, saturation, temperature, tint and exposure in your NLE until you're happy with the look. See the LX100 shot in the example video for how well this can work. This shot was before EOSHD Pro Color existed. It wasn't using the Standard photo style, instead I think it was Natural -5 contrast before I knew better! Both.

I did warm up the colour a bit, as it benefits skin tones. The example you're seeing though - Fire light is red! It's warm and it's how it looked to the eye. That's just the way the scene is. So it remains realistic. Just more pleasing to the eye than the usual yellow, zombie, horror film look of Sony and Panasonic. Unless that is what you want and you are shooting horror I plan to update the instructions for FCPX giving more details for people using a LUT for the first time. Plugin works well I think.

Sample video Shot at 0:40 is the standard Panasonic colour without EOSHD Pro Color though... Do you mean the later shots (1D X Mark II and G85 with Pro Color?)

Yes it will work with Vegas and the plugin. Same for FCPX and the LUT loader It's a matter of taste. You have full control over the tone after applying the LUT.

Read more about it! http://www.eoshd.com/2016/12/now-available-eoshd-pro-color-for-panasonic-cameras-gh4-gx85-g85-and-more/ It’s time to remove that harsh, clinical digital edge from Panasonic’s in-camera colour and white balance.

Eric you have no experience of what you're talking about at all because you don't run a camera review blog. It doesn't seem sensible to campaign against the crippling of video on the 80D if Canon are a paying advertiser on your site. It doesn't seem like a good strategy to make a big fuss about a shortcoming of a particular Canon DSLR... they might pull further advertising. British retailer WEX refused me an affiliate commission account because of my criticism of Canon's crippled video features over the years. They were in full agreement with me over this but Canon are their biggest account. If you've just returned from meeting Canon's people at a PR organised event where you exchanged business cards, I know how difficult it is to then go on to criticise them the in harshest terms these flaws deserve....because I have been in the exact same situation myself after being invited to Sony and Panasonic organised events for filmmakers. Furthermore, the negative feedback you do give to the company or your readers will be heavily watered down with politeness when it really needs to be shouted urgently and a big fuss made so it forces them to change. Steve Jobs didn't softly prod or dodge around the issues, he took a flame thrower to them. When something is wrong with a product or it lacks innovation you have to do this. Bullshit. Not true, there are huge differences in relative image quality between models of similar positioning and price when it comes to video, also their suitability for a particular job. You wouldn't take a GH1 instead of an A7S to a low light shoot, unless you're an idiot... and your thinking is idiotic Eric, sad to say but it really is. Oh ffs. I'm talking mostly about the Canon sponsored video which is the subject of the advert. When it comes to Barney and his fucking boat I couldn't care less. It's not exactly a Werner Herzog level of filmmaking. You may call it a great video. I call it an easy to film piece of shit with no personality, no emotional investment required at all or life experience, zero challenge for the audience, no thoughts provoked or challenging messages conveyed. On top of that it's not even entertaining. It's video advertorial. Haha.

I go to the Saturn there quite often too, it's where I've bought a lot of my kit! Very sad that this should happen on my adopted door step. Apparently the attacker is still on the run and the guy they arrested was a case of mistaken identity. So be vigilant Berliners...

The content is shit though. Tag or no tag.

Not always but occasionally they have decided to behave this way. Edit - Yes it looks like it has again now.