Chrad

Paul Leeming posted this example of extreme VLog ghosting at high ISO on the GH5 facebook page:

Another user mentioned that Panasonic has said that if there is a demand to turn off NR completely, they will do it. Perhaps it's time to voice your concerns to Panasonic if ghosting like this is a problem for you.
Personally, I would prefer to control the NR myself, and I'm sure many others would too.

Why commit to working in a challenging and uncompromised aesthetic when you can do something just as good without making a difficult artistic choice: camera tests! Wonderful 4K raw-shot camera tests of the gardens, parks and city scapes near 'aspiring filmmakers' everywhere, coming soon to Vimeo. 

Well, I've just finished a 17 minute documentary short. I shot 5 hours of ML 1080p for this. I had to buy an external hard drive to stick the original MLVs on as backup - around €80. And the log 4444 transcodes that I edited and graded from sit on my internal hard drive, taking up 400GB. These costs are not high. Obviously the costs will be higher for a longer project, but quite manageable. And the 3K sample I posted earlier is a roughly similar data rate, due to the 60% compression of the new lossless 14bit.
However, the "elephant in the room" for me is this:
ML users are familiar with this, but newcomers to ML may not realise that these advancements in resolution come at a cost: while you're shooting the LCD runs at about one frame every 2 seconds. This means that it's almost pointless to try to move the camera or to change focus while recording. The feedback is so slow that you're pretty much guessing and it's impossible to be precise. Will this ever change? Who knows?
Everyone should read a1ex's updated first page post:
https://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=19300.0
The new modes are ideal if you're making work in the style of James Benning, though! (fantastic antidote to the hectic pace of contemporary media)

For professional use, this is baffling funny:
[from/on FAQ:]
"Since these settings were pushed to limit, the risk of corrupted frames is high."
 
Guess if that was written on the new GH5 manual... LOL
Sorry, couldn't resist! :-)
 

The answer was regarding if peaking was a break dealer like DPAF, it is not, is it a great feature?, yes of course, but anyone can live without it with relativity no big issues, DPAF in the other hand is an amazing tool for docs and run&gun, if I am going to shoot a doc I want it, can I shoot the doc without it?, sure, but the quantity of pressure and work you put out of your shoulders is a lot....no shoot lost due to bad focus, that's just fantastic!!!
If I am more oriented to fiction, then probably Canon is not the right tool, I use a Red One for that kind of shooting......and I would love an ARRI
Now, I could not be more less excited about the GH5, is it a great tool?, sure, for the right people and projects, will I use it?, no way, I have Canon glasses, I don`t want to use a metabones, and if the rumors are true, at least part of it, like reduction of the crop factor and C-log, I will choose a 5Dmkiv over a GH5 any day of the week.

Not this shit again. 
It's only a quarter size sensor if super 35 is a half size sensor and super 16 is a 1/8 size sensor. 
Low light on this thing is actually pretty good - it's not the A7S but it's comparable to the A6300, A6500. Maybe a stop under, becoming noticeable as you get to the upper end of the ISO range.  


Only in terms of depth of field, but if you see the sensor size as a potential advantage that allows you deeper DOF for the same level of light transmission, then that can be an advantage. There's also a (admittedly very expensive) 7-14 2.8 lens from an Olympus, and a 7.5mm F2 manual focus almost-pancake from Laowa launches shortly. If you want to work with Speed Boosters a ' FF 18mm F1.8' is attainable with a 14mm 2.8 and a Speed Booster XL. But how often do you shoot at Ultra wide? There are a bunch of fast options for M43 from the 20mm on full frame and upward. 
I guess it just depends on what you're using it for. You have a point that the auto focus is weak vs the competition, and also about the body getting a bit big for micro 4/3.  I think that's preferable to a too small body that overheats. I'm guessing that the IBIS, 10 bit, high frame rates, etc necessitated a size increase from the GH4, along with the professional features they've added (HDMI and dual SD slots). 
If you're all about low light, a Canon cinema EOS or Sony A7s makes much more sense. 

Not this shit again. 
It's only a quarter size sensor if super 35 is a half size sensor and super 16 is a 1/8 size sensor. 
Low light on this thing is actually pretty good - it's not the A7S but it's comparable to the A6300, A6500. Maybe a stop under, becoming noticeable as you get to the upper end of the ISO range.  


Only in terms of depth of field, but if you see the sensor size as a potential advantage that allows you deeper DOF for the same level of light transmission, then that can be an advantage. There's also a (admittedly very expensive) 7-14 2.8 lens from an Olympus, and a 7.5mm F2 manual focus almost-pancake from Laowa launches shortly. If you want to work with Speed Boosters a ' FF 18mm F1.8' is attainable with a 14mm 2.8 and a Speed Booster XL. But how often do you shoot at Ultra wide? There are a bunch of fast options for M43 from the 20mm on full frame and upward. 
I guess it just depends on what you're using it for. You have a point that the auto focus is weak vs the competition, and also about the body getting a bit big for micro 4/3.  I think that's preferable to a too small body that overheats. I'm guessing that the IBIS, 10 bit, high frame rates, etc necessitated a size increase from the GH4, along with the professional features they've added (HDMI and dual SD slots). 
If you're all about low light, a Canon cinema EOS or Sony A7s makes much more sense. 

The question is .... what should we wait for once the a7S iii is announced?

Thanks for your input! Means a lot and will hopefully get around to get a tightened up version online in a few weeks. Regarding light, I shot the whole thing with one ikan led panel I picked up a few years ago for pretty cheap. It can be seen in the BTS footage I posted further up. Am excited to dive into this again! 

I have never had any overheating with my original A7s and that is even after trying to produce it to see what it would take.
I haven ever had any problem with Sony colour either and actually find it more true to life than most and never had any problem with any camera for colour having owned/used just about all brands over decades (mostly for stills).       At least with most Sony cameras, if you don't grade in video for around $10 you can buy the colour grading app and add many millions of variations that can literally take you years to try all the combinations.   I got the App with my A7 but have not needed it really.
I don't expect an A7sii to be any real competition to the GH5 (and don't expect the GH5 to be any competition to the A7siii either).
I think they will complement each other and (mostly) have different strengths and weaknesses.       
I think there will be a more expensive pro A7 series camera out before there is an A7siii aimed at both stills and video and it should be good at low light (as FF should be) but not the low light king.          
If that happens, then the A7s iii will still be crippled by comparison in some ways -maybe still CDAF only, AF I would expect to improve each generation but still not be all that great (compared to the best AF cameras), I would expect it to still be 20mp or less.
The first version A7s is my all time favourite camera so far and I expect to use it for a couple of years yet for my uses.      By the time I replace it (I hope), other formats will be as good in low light so I can have more choice.     Maybe I might find a phone good enough by then?     Who knows!

For many that have moved away from Sony, they'd need to improve the following:
* Figure out the overheating issue
* Improve their color science
* Move to an IBIS that really works and is demonstrably superior to just an OIS lens alone
* Implement 4K60p...again, without overheating
* A flip out VF would be nice, thank you. 
I'd be surprised to see if they really come up with something competitive to the GH5, but I'd certainly like to see that happen. It just seems to me that Sony is so set in their ways, they rarely deviate from the path. 
I've used Sony cameras for years, so I'd like to see them give Panasonic a run for their money. The more competition the better.

I think "the large portion of video shooters that never use AF" is not because people don't want to but because the tech/cost isn't there.
If every camera had dual pixel video AF from the year 2100 you can bet almost everyone would use it.  I barely use continuous AF in video not because I don't want to, but because it's just not very viable on most cameras.  Can you imagine if there was very good object tracking and almost perfect AF?  Would be amazing for gimbal and run and gun. 

What about the large portion of video shooters that never use AF? Seems like more of a hobbyist hangup than something that'd hold back a working pro. 

The main advances I see from this camera are the 1080p out of camera being of comparable sharpness to downscaled UHD, the ability to use stabilization with my manual primes, and usable V-Log files and monitoring without an external recorder.
The low light imprpvement and removal of the sensor crop for 4K are just bonuses.

Not this shit again. 
It's only a quarter size sensor if super 35 is a half size sensor and super 16 is a 1/8 size sensor. 
Low light on this thing is actually pretty good - it's not the A7S but it's comparable to the A6300, A6500. Maybe a stop under, becoming noticeable as you get to the upper end of the ISO range.  


Only in terms of depth of field, but if you see the sensor size as a potential advantage that allows you deeper DOF for the same level of light transmission, then that can be an advantage. There's also a (admittedly very expensive) 7-14 2.8 lens from an Olympus, and a 7.5mm F2 manual focus almost-pancake from Laowa launches shortly. If you want to work with Speed Boosters a ' FF 18mm F1.8' is attainable with a 14mm 2.8 and a Speed Booster XL. But how often do you shoot at Ultra wide? There are a bunch of fast options for M43 from the 20mm on full frame and upward. 
I guess it just depends on what you're using it for. You have a point that the auto focus is weak vs the competition, and also about the body getting a bit big for micro 4/3.  I think that's preferable to a too small body that overheats. I'm guessing that the IBIS, 10 bit, high frame rates, etc necessitated a size increase from the GH4, along with the professional features they've added (HDMI and dual SD slots). 
If you're all about low light, a Canon cinema EOS or Sony A7s makes much more sense. 

Not this shit again. 
It's only a quarter size sensor if super 35 is a half size sensor and super 16 is a 1/8 size sensor. 
Low light on this thing is actually pretty good - it's not the A7S but it's comparable to the A6300, A6500. Maybe a stop under, becoming noticeable as you get to the upper end of the ISO range.  


Only in terms of depth of field, but if you see the sensor size as a potential advantage that allows you deeper DOF for the same level of light transmission, then that can be an advantage. There's also a (admittedly very expensive) 7-14 2.8 lens from an Olympus, and a 7.5mm F2 manual focus almost-pancake from Laowa launches shortly. If you want to work with Speed Boosters a ' FF 18mm F1.8' is attainable with a 14mm 2.8 and a Speed Booster XL. But how often do you shoot at Ultra wide? There are a bunch of fast options for M43 from the 20mm on full frame and upward. 
I guess it just depends on what you're using it for. You have a point that the auto focus is weak vs the competition, and also about the body getting a bit big for micro 4/3.  I think that's preferable to a too small body that overheats. I'm guessing that the IBIS, 10 bit, high frame rates, etc necessitated a size increase from the GH4, along with the professional features they've added (HDMI and dual SD slots). 
If you're all about low light, a Canon cinema EOS or Sony A7s makes much more sense. 

Not this shit again. 
It's only a quarter size sensor if super 35 is a half size sensor and super 16 is a 1/8 size sensor. 
Low light on this thing is actually pretty good - it's not the A7S but it's comparable to the A6300, A6500. Maybe a stop under, becoming noticeable as you get to the upper end of the ISO range.  


Only in terms of depth of field, but if you see the sensor size as a potential advantage that allows you deeper DOF for the same level of light transmission, then that can be an advantage. There's also a (admittedly very expensive) 7-14 2.8 lens from an Olympus, and a 7.5mm F2 manual focus almost-pancake from Laowa launches shortly. If you want to work with Speed Boosters a ' FF 18mm F1.8' is attainable with a 14mm 2.8 and a Speed Booster XL. But how often do you shoot at Ultra wide? There are a bunch of fast options for M43 from the 20mm on full frame and upward. 
I guess it just depends on what you're using it for. You have a point that the auto focus is weak vs the competition, and also about the body getting a bit big for micro 4/3.  I think that's preferable to a too small body that overheats. I'm guessing that the IBIS, 10 bit, high frame rates, etc necessitated a size increase from the GH4, along with the professional features they've added (HDMI and dual SD slots). 
If you're all about low light, a Canon cinema EOS or Sony A7s makes much more sense. 

The main advances I see from this camera are the 1080p out of camera being of comparable sharpness to downscaled UHD, the ability to use stabilization with my manual primes, and usable V-Log files and monitoring without an external recorder.
The low light imprpvement and removal of the sensor crop for 4K are just bonuses.

The main advances I see from this camera are the 1080p out of camera being of comparable sharpness to downscaled UHD, the ability to use stabilization with my manual primes, and usable V-Log files and monitoring without an external recorder.
The low light imprpvement and removal of the sensor crop for 4K are just bonuses.

This has always been a feature of GH cameras. They can crop in to the central 1080p (and now 4K) of the image in ETC mode. 
On GH5 the 1080p ETC mode should bring it to 5.6x.

Pretty stunning footage. Highlight rolloff seems great.

Don't understand why GH5 isn't your first choice? It has everything you're asking for.

Pretty stunning footage. Highlight rolloff seems great.

from Kholi Hicks...
"GH5 w V-Log
UHD out to BMD 4K ASSIST/ProRes HQ (Does not take the DCI 4K signal)
V-Log to Comet Color LUT (early early stages, converted from my B-Side LUT for Blackmagic's Ursa Mini 4.6K/Pro)
Sony Cinealta 4K 35 and 25mm (In that order) w/HotRod Cameras PL mount 
NiSi IR ND 1.8
Early thoughts: Reminds me of the A7SII, honestly. Not that far off, nearly same color and aesthetic, less rolling shutter of course. Pana may beat out the A7SII for base color, though.
Tell your favorite LUT builder to jump on building some, not a huge fan of what comes out of the camera stock. Alexa to Rec709 doesn't look bad as a starting point, still needs a fair amount of massaging IMO.
Don't have much time with it, going to mess with CineV and acquire some more V-Log footage to tune the Comet Color port."
 
 

I think dynamic range has more value than seeing out a window. Makes for smoother and more pleasant transitions between light and dark, even if you don't need to see the detail on either of those ends.
That and color and motion cadence are what seperates the good from the great cameras, in my view.