jonpais

I personally would not shoot higher than ISO 800 with my GH4, but I guess if you don't mind spending hours de-noising your footage, you could get away with it. Not sure what you mean that all your handheld shots are with a 12mm lens... is that because you're concerned about camera shake with longer focal lengths? That sounds rather limiting. Anyhow, I've owned both the GH3 and the GH4, and for me the difference between the two is like night and day, both in terms of usability and image quality. Not only are the GH4's colors better (IMO), but if you shoot 4K and downsample to 1080p, there is virtually no aliasing or moire. If you shoot in low light, focus peaking and monochrome live view on the GH4 are invaluable tools to have (I have found however, that on the Fuji X-T2, the LCD is so clear that I don't need to rely on peaking). If low light is something you do on a regular basis, then you should seriously consider one of the newer Panasonics, which not only have focus peaking and 4K, but also IBIS and better low light performance. I would take a properly focused, shake-free image over one that perhaps ekes out a 1/2 stop more in dynamic range (if that is even the case) any day of the week. And if you aren't already heavily invested in u4/3 glass, you might even look into stepping up to a larger sensor camera. If you decide to stick with u4/3, the IBIS of the GX85/G85 is going to be of enormous benefit when shooting with a speed booster, too.

Hi Jason, it's morning here in Malaysia. I just put the low light clips I shot the other day on the timeline, when it dawned on me that you were referring to the blown highlights from the light outdoors, not the subjects' faces. There would be no way to recover those, and even Pro Neg does not increase the dynamic range of the camera. In order to save a little more of the background detail, you'd need to shoot F-Log. Even then, that's an enormous difference between shadow and highlight detail. Best to shoot from a different angle to avoid those problems. The reason I shot against bright light is because in low light situations, there are often light sources facing directly at the lens, and I wanted to see how the lens handled that. With my GH4, some lenses would produce awful veiling flare, for example, the 12-35mm f/2.8, as a result of insufficient lens coatings, which is one reason I've been waiting for Sigma to release a fast, wide u4/3 prime. Wide angles are particularly prone to this problem, because of their angle of view. BTW, I know I've said this before, and it's mentioned in Max Yuryev's review: ISO 6400 is not ISO 6400. Sony's low light monsters will be brighter at ISO 6400 than either the Panasonic or Fuji cameras. I went digging around for information on how ISO figures are reached, and learned that there are no fewer than three methods Japanese manufacturers use, as well as a fourth one, if you include marketing shenanigans. From the late 1800s up until the digital era, there were as many as ten different ways to measure light sensitivity. Some film manufacturers could put BLAHBLAH 1600 on their box of film, when in reality it was 400, and it wouldn't be fibbing, because they didn't say ASA or ISO.

completely invalid! ?

Those shots were with iDynamic on??

Believe me, I want to, but I just bought the G85 w/out lens, I'm in Malaysia, and I won't be returning to Vietnam until the 30th of December. Right now, all I've got is the X-T2, no stabilizer, no tripod. ?

Still confused...we know the sensors are different...

I used AWB: if you balanced color manually, I'm sure it would look even better. Maybe the red cola machine behind him... The dynamic range is limited, so I had to choose between good shadow detail or highlight detail. In some of the shots, I couldn't even see into the shadows with my own eyes. It doesn't have as good a dynamic range as the Sony for example. I didn't check the scopes when it was on the timeline, so not sure if they are recoverable. I can check that for you tomorrow. You can see noise in the wall in the shot of the fellow with the beard, but it's not objectionable, and I know for certain that it could be lessened with neat video. It is far less annoying than some stuff I've shot with the GH4. I would love to do an interview with Kim Gooi, he is articulate and extremely bright, but I didn't plan on it, so I didn't bring any mics with me. Actually, I am very interested in getting a Lav mic, since I've never been satisfied with the sound from my Rode shotguns. Pro neg may be even flatter than Classic Chrome, I can try to shoot some of that this week as well...

So, what's the relationship between dynamic range and low light sensitivity? If ISO 800 is the highest I would shoot with the GH4 and people are saying the G80 can shoot 3200, does that mean it has higher dynamic range as well? Or does it mean it just has less noise in the shadows, but no more gradations between white and black?

Sorry about the wait. The wifi here's very unreliable. At ISO 6400, the Fuji holds up quite well, and I probably wouldn’t bother de-noising the footage even if it were going to end up being used in a project. In all but the first two shots, I used Fuji’s Classic Chrome film simulation, which, together with highlight and shadow tone adjustments, helps to soften up the the contrast under harsh lighting conditions; though Astia may be Fuji’s flattest profile. Because the Fuji 35mm f/2 lens is so small, it’s the perfect choice when you want to be discrete. I was resting my elbows on a table for support, but someone kept kicking it, so sorry about all the camera shake. The cool guy wearing the beret is Kim Gooi, a correspondent and photographer during the Vietnam war. Free background music from JewelBeat.com

I just bought the G85 in Malaysia for a little over $725.00 USD, I guess because the Malaysian ringgit is currently at a historic low. A super bargain! I didn't bring any lenses for u4/3 with me, so I won't be able to shoot with it till I return to Vietnam on 30/1. ? I only had the chance to hold the body, and I much prefer the smaller form factor to my GH4. I imagine not many G80 owners will be willing to shell out $1,600.00 for the Nocticron, but I can assure you that if you do, you won't regret it. It has inceredible rendering and the bokeh is unbelievable. It is also one of the best built lenses in the u4/3 system.

@jasonmillard81 I just shot a few seconds of handheld video with the 35mm f/2 at ISO 6400 with aperture between f/2 and f/2.8 and the image is clean and sharp. I will try to share this evening if the wifi here cooperates.

This video was posted here a while back, has some impressive night shots. Funny though, no 35mm or 50-140mm ☹️. I believe I read somewhere that Fuji will be releasing a 50mm f/2, which works out to 85mm in 4K, so should be a handy little portrait lens.

Thanks, Jason. I'll be in Malaysia for two weeks, maybe when I get back I can try some low light stuff... But with which lens? Also, did you get the kit lens with the XT2? I don't currently own any fast Fuji glass, just 3 lenses, the fastest being the 35mm f/2.

Everyone here already knows about my aversion to variable aperture zooms, but I've got a lot of time on my hands, so can you share your thoughts on how you can justify the purchase of the 16-55mm, given that it's four times more expensive, weighs a ton, etc., etc. Are you unhappy with the kit lens? Sorry, I'm bored, just want someone to talk to. ????

@Bioskop.Inc It works for me. I wouldn't add a lot of narration, but maybe a few snippets of Kennedy here and there might be effective.

Lumix lenses are optimized for DFD, whereas Olympus are not.

For me, Fuji's XT2 is the best camera of 2016. Which won't stop me from getting another Lumix, though. ?

I wouldn't be so surprised - after all, this is Fuji's first serious video capable camera. They know how to do touch screens, the XT2's successor will likely have touch screen, and probably better implemented than on the A6500. Like I said before, given IBIS and touch screen on a camera with nice colors or one lacking those features but with superb colors, I'd choose the latter any day. And honestly, in my brief experience with the XT2, I'm finding I'm not having to dive into the menus to change settings like white balance nearly as often as with my GH4, and the joystick works great for my kind of shooting.

@Andrew Reid Are you finding the color of the G80/85 also a vast improvement over the GH4? I'm considering picking one of these up on my trip to Malaysia this week if I can find the body without lens (I've got 12 already ?).

That's why I don't like step-up rings. You do realize the 16-55mm is a monster lens, don't you? Definitely not something you'd carry around as an all-rounder like the Panasonic 12-35mm f/2.8. Anyhow, here's a clip I made with the Fuji 50-140mm f/2.8. I followed Max Yuryev's suggestion and raised shadows -2 and lowered highlights -1. With the flatter contrast, what appeared to be oversharpening is no longer an issue either. happy camper.

I intend to try that next. Like I promised, I went ahead and shot with the 50-140mm this morning. Build quality of this monster is on par with Zeiss. The focus, zoom and aperture rings are dampened to high hell, which I happen to love. Autofocus is fast and completely, utterly silent. The 16-55mm f/2.8 amazed me, the 35mm f/2 astounded me, and now the 50-140mm f/2.8 just blew my socks off. It really is, without exaggeration, a flawless instrument. I followed Max Yuryev's recommendation and raised the shadows by (confusingly, -2) and lowered highlights by -1. The images are flatter now, not Panasonic 'Natural' flat, but perfect for just shooting, putting on the timeline and uploading to YouTube without any grading. The colors are not 'accurate', not in the viewfinder, and not when viewed on a desktop at home. What Fuji does is transform the color into something extremely pleasing. When I see lens and camera tests online where the reviewer has placed a color chart next to the subject, well... that's all well and good, but fidelity to nature does not an appealing image make. While a lot of filmmakers in the online community are always asking for a useable Log profile in their cameras, a great many professionals: documentarians, news gatherers, vloggers and the like, just want an image they can easily acquire and deliver. Because I'm a hobbyist, not a professional, and I do this just for my own enjoyment, I can say that, given a camera with IBIS and touchscreen with nice colors, or a device without those features, but which produces spectacular color, I'd choose the latter in a heartbeat.

Thanks for the comments everyone. I still think the colors are a bit too saturated, the blacks are crushed and the highlights are blown out. I'm going to shoot with the 50-140mm this morning with shadow tone set to -2 and highlights at -1 and see if I can't get a flatter image out of this thing. Also, even though I've got in-camera sharpening as far down as it will go, the images stil look way too sharp to me. For run and gun, documentary or guerilla filmmaking, you need a camera that has everything at your fingertips; it should also be reliable. Some things the XT2 has going for it are a wide selection of superb lenses, including a number of fast primes; it has fast autofocus and a brilliant EVF; quick turnaround time in post, since you won't be spending hours tweaking the colors (unless you want to!). Downsides are that many of the lenses in their catalogue aren't stabilized; exposure dials and menu items are all accessed through physical controls, which takes longer than a touch screen, and using them means noise and camera shake. The LCD isn't fully articulating like some of the Panasonics. You can hear more about many of the advantages and disadvantages in Max Yuryev's review, or read my own short review here. For a lot less money, you could get the Lumix G80/85. I don't own the camera (yet!) but the single greatest pitfall I see is weak AF-C performance.

And yet - everyone in the world owns a Canon!

?

So clean looking for such high ISOs. Thanks. I would never push my GH4 past Panasonic's inflated setting of 800. I'll be picking up a Lumix in Malaysia next week if they can get me a body without lens. I've already got a dozen lenses, don't need any more.