jonpais

And for those interested in technical stuff, and zoom lenses in particular, this makes a good read.

You're probably right about that, but I really like being able to shoot with a small, light, fast, longer focal length on a gimbal. It allows me to throw the background out of focus, and since most single handed stabilizer work seems to be shot with wides, I think it differentiates your work from some of the rest. I've even shot with the G X Vario 35-100 f/2.8! But it does make framing a moving subject pretty difficult. ? I shot my entire Fuji Acros video with a 50mm equivalent lens (35mm f/2) and X-T2 on the Crane. But I guess I wouldn't recommend that to everyone.

There's no such thing as a cinematic looking lens, and the word organic doesn't mean much either in my book. Switching from a 12mm to a 14 or 15mm makes no sense (15mm is way expensive). If 12mm is too wide, go with the inexpensive Panasonic 20mm f/1.7. Then concentrate on lighting, content, white balance and exposure.

Personally, I haven't been impressed with what I've seen so far of the PanLeica 12-60mm, and since I already own the G X Vario 12-35mm f/2.8, and v.2 is essentially the same thing, I would avoid getting any of these overpriced zooms. Recently, Olympus released the brilliant 12-100mm f/4 for those who absolutely must own a universal zoom and don't want to sacrifice quality, and that is the lens I would recommend without hesitation to those who want a lens to record travel. But not a single zoom in the m43 lineup can compare to the native primes. And while it's not a one-size-fits-all lens (no good lens is!), the Olympus M. Zuiko 75mm f/1.8 has impressed me no end: it is all metal construction, spectacularly sharp, has gorgeous bokeh, it balances nicely on m43 bodies and it is quite simply 2.5 inches of nirvana. There have been many in the forums recommending lenses, but it doesn't mean a thing if they can't back up their words with some images. So here we go... Music by Eric Matyas www.soundimage.org

The Olympus M.Zuiko ED 12-100 f/4 IS PRO performs brilliantly.

The noise reduction on the G85 is pretty aggressive at higher ISOs as well, so I can't say this comes as a big surprise or anything. What would be really shocking would be if the GH5 were as good as the Sony. When I saw the title, I thought the OP was referring to using a denoiser like Neat Video on some clips he downloaded. Maybe they are the same thing, but I would change the title to GH5 Noise Reduction @ high ISOs Simply Sucks... Tolerance for noise and smudging of detail is a personal matter, but I don't think I'd ever shoot at ISO 6400 with a u4/3 camera.

hahaha

Well said for someone who believes the video movement is dead.

These samples are not so much color graded as they are color corrected. There's a difference.

Exactly what I've been saying now for months. I think a lot of people are blaming their cameras for the the color, noise and so on, but most of today's cameras, if you expose and white balance carefully, can give a great image, provided the lighting is good enough to begin with.

Hi Sebastian, I've never owned a camera with a top LCD display, I'm sure it would be fun to have on any one of my cameras, but aside from when you're shooting on a tripod, how is it so functional? I mean, you'd still have to take your eye away from the EVF to use it, wouldn't you? Also, I've only used the camera for a couple months, and I've never encountered purple flaring, but I've read several places online, including MirrorLessons, that the problem can be avoided by simply moving the camera a touch when you're composing. But the camera does suffer from a ton of issues, some of which I've gone into here.

From everything I've heard, it's Nikon's lithography department that is being axed, that it's a great idea they don't manufacture the DL cameras and no, they are not going anywhere anytime soon.

I don't know about the M, never used it, but I'd never travel with the Crane (a) with the batteries inside, or (b) with the camera attached. I usually do like you, though, and wrap the two parts separately with T-shirts, and put them in my carry-on. I'd like to know if there is an easier way as well...

I was watching Birdman the other night and couldn't stop thinking to myself, 'if only it had been shot on film!' If only Andy Warhol, Robert Motherwell and David Hockney hadn't used acrylics...

Panasonic is definitely going down if the GH5 doesn't take off, no question about it.

OMG! I don't know anything, but it looks like the noise is from underexposure.

I don't see any reason to come down so harshly on DPR like a pack of bloodhounds. We've already seen much worse, at least I have - and more is yet to come. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought DPR was a gear review site, not a production studio, so it's not fair to compare their work to that of Griffin Hammond. 'Wobbly!', 'Fail!', 'Shaky!', 'Atrocious color!' Actually, I can count the number of camera reviewers who even know how to shoot on one hand.

Probably a good idea, whenever possible. But I bought my GH4 here and still the local Panasonic service is sub-par.

?

First, sorry to hear this. Panasonic customer care in Vietnam is just as bad, if not worse.

Yes, probably works best on a tripod, but I could see myself using it quite a bit.

Either I'm just being realistic now, or I've lowered my expectations, whatever. I already realize I could get much better skin tones than in these shots (they are all magenta, but we already know that's not the sensor's fault) - the color science won't be drastically different from previous Panasonic cameras. Also, although I've been criticized about my speculations, DPR don't say which lens they used - I'm guessing the 12-60mm - which is not going to give a cinematic look to the footage. The colors will be fine, I can assure you. Also, they were probably shooting under fluorescent lighting, and they didn't do much color correction. I wouldn't worry about the color.

Do not throw your money away on the Panasonic 12-35mm f/2.8: it's nutty expensive, slow even by 2012 standards, and not pin-sharp wide open - on top of which, it's super plastic fantastic: and by f/4, unless you're shooting up close, the bokeh won't be spectacular. I'd sooner spend $600.00 total on the Sigma DC DN 30mm f/1.4 and 12mm f/2 Samyang, and save the $400.00 or whatever. Of course, even with in-camera sharpening turned all the way down (for a cinema look), nobody is going to say your images are blurry or anything like that - same goes for the Olympus 17mm f/1.8... You're right about the Olympus 75mm, though - you've got to be able to have some distance from the subject. But it's indisputably the sharpest lens with the nicest bokeh of any native mount u4/3 lens, surpassing even the legendary Nocticron, which costs some $700 USD more. I'll be posting another field test this evening, if you want to have a look. If manual focus doesn't intimidate you, you might be better off buying a few vintage lenses and a cheap Chinese adapter. The Samyang cine lenses will work in a pinch, too, Just not wide open. Zoom lenses aren't the trash they were when I was studying photography back in the 1980s, but none of the u4/3 zooms can hold a candle to the best primes in the system. Actually, anything at all will suffice: you might shoot better videos of your precocious daughter with a $50 lens than I ever could with a $10,000 Cooke. I would still suggest investing in some primes that are no slower than f/2, or a focal reducer (the Mitakon for $150?) and some APS-C lenses.

Now we're talking!

May I ask what your sharpening and noise reduction settings were in camera?