IronFilm

Just now, jonpais said:

If that were the case, what about Sony?

Different companies have different priorities for their reputations. (and companies can also misjudge the impact of compromising in one area over another)

Sony is gunning for "small" and "full frame" (which leads to overheating and poor battery life, that is their trade off)

Panasonic is gunning for "reliable" and "long battery life".

Small/FF certainly is popular with hobbyists!

Reliable/battery is popular with professionals!

#potstirring 

3 minutes ago, jonpais said:

@IronFilm When I've finished typing all the features like 6K anamorphic, anamorphic de-squeeze, ETC mode, IBIS, fully articulating LCD screen, HLG and the rest found on the GH5 that aren't found on every entry-level cinema camera, I'll make a PDF and PM you.  

hahahaha! Ok, I'll give you a point or two there.  

6K anamorphic, very true! Is hard to count the cameras on your fingers that can do this for sub $10K and need more than one hand. 

ETC mode? Been around since GH2
IBIS? Common as chips. 
Articulated screen????? Ditto!!! Even more so.

1 minute ago, Emanuel said:

They could be listed for same 2000 bucks, I believe. The Panasonic man said in his interview they had developed both camera models at same time. A business decision made they postpone the launch.

IF that is true, then obviously the GH5S has a massively bigger profit margin than the GH5. 

Which would prove a point opposite to what you are saying before. (that Panasonic removed IBIS as was worrying GH5S might cut into GH5 sales too much)

2 hours ago, Chrad said:

It probably is part of the point, but I think Panasonic care about their reputation as far as batteries are concerned. GH3 and GH4 could go all day on a single battery, and I like to think they were proud enough of the positive feedback they got for that feature that they'd have been hesitant about cutting it to the level of the GH5. If they cut the battery life further on this model, they'd sacrifice one of their perceived advantages, at a time when other camera companies are nipping at their heels. They did the same with IBIS, but I guess someone at Panasonic perceives 'reliability' as more important to the brand perception than 'stabilised'.

It only takes ONE product flop (such as shipping a camera with a 20 minute battery life, if you switch on all the features) to harm the entire product line's image. 

You'd get countless mindless idiots telling other idiots "don't buy Panasonic because they have poor battery life", when the exact opposite is true! (for all but one)

2 hours ago, Dimitris Stasinos said:

But those exaggerated claims like: "We asked the pros and they said NO, IBIS sucks, don't implement this, cinema cameras don't have IBIS, leave this off board please", cmon these are bullsh$t... GH5's target group (i am talking about the majority here) does not mount their cameras on cars, and even if they will, the proper way is to put the camera on a gimbal.

No one has ever said that is the only reason it is not included. Just pointing out there is also an upside to its exclusion, and it is not all negative. 

And clearly Panasonic is targeting niches of niches, as that is the way to make headway against the duopoly's strangehold. Thus it kinda makes sense for them to consider offering a non-IBIS model if it gets requested. (obviously not ALL THEIR CAMERAS without this, but at least have *one* model without it. Which is what they have done. I bet we will have to wait a long long time before they offer this niche of a niche camera again that is without IBIS)

5 minutes ago, Emanuel said:

The most ingenious here is the fact practice redefines theory... ; ) I've learned with what I've seen :-)

The only way a person wants a cheaper product purchases instead of a more expensive one, is if strangely the margins on the cheaper product are bigger than the more expensive one (which is not common, but does happen). 

Well if this is true, that only proves my suggestion that Panasonic had no spare fat in the budget to cram more features into the GH5S while still meeting their target price point. 

2 minutes ago, Emanuel said:

Thanks David for your input. I guess we'll never know, actually. Here is why I also don't buy the technical explanation for IBIS absence on GH5S version.

Well there are so many reasons, we don't need all of the theories to be right! Even if only one of them is the real reason, that is quite sufficient. 

For me just this one reason here strikes me as a highly likely one: COST! Because the GH5S is already the most expensive ever MFT camera, imagine how much of a backlash they might have got if they'd pushed the price even higher? 

I've got no idea how much IBIS would cost, but if the addition requires redesigning the body, then that will very very sharply increase the costs! (and get even more people mad that they need to throw out their GH3/GH4/GH5 cages, or worse... their waterproof case they'd spent mega $$$ on!)

2 minutes ago, jonpais said:

@IronFilm The same could be said for a dozen or more other features on the GH5* cameras.  

Such as? You can find 10bit or 4K or slow motion on quite a few sub $10K cameras. I was going to say perhaps waveforms is somewhat unique with only a handful sub $10K ones having that, but hang on once I think about that for even half a second I realise it is clearly nonsense, because hey even the lowly C100 has that! 

So what exactly are you referring to @jonpais that the GH5 has but very few sub $10K cameras have? (remember that 4K 60fps even exists on lowly action cameras now!)

15 hours ago, RWR said:

Would love for that to be the case...especially given higher sensitivity..there will likely be something in the frame that's "hot". If so..that, along with timecode i/o would help in more pro setups.

Timecode is a game-changer in this camera class. Even c200 lacks it. Not just a multicam feature..more often it's for dual system audio crews.

Regarding Panny rep's comment on audio, hard to say whether there is improvement beyond the onboard mic. They need to put the monitoring latency bypass feature back in.

It is astonishing how many cameras lack TC!  C100/C200/FS5/FS7(if without XDCA)/FS700/FS100/EX1/etc etc etc

Seems five figures for a camera is the point at which then TC becomes "normal". Sub $10K RRP then TC is quite rare :-/ 

With a few exceptions, such as: Panasonic EVA1 and Panasonic GH5S!! Thank you very much Panasonic. 

Maybe, just maaaaaaaaaaaaybe, Panasonic saw the writing on the wall with the Tentacle Syncs and Zoom F8/F4 (Tentacles + F8 is a GAME CHANGER!! For bringing quality features + TC to a very low low price point, in very small packages too!) and thus Panasonic decided to implement timecode more widely with their products?

17 hours ago, Cliff Totten said:

You can bet that the Panasonic DVX200 will be the next camera with this sensor. That is going to be a SWEET ENG camera. (if Sony allows it to be sold for that purpose, that is)

Would be very nice. One of the great benefits of this amazing lowlight sensor would be with a superzoom lens on an ENG camera, that can still perform well even with a slow F stop at the end of the zoom

16 hours ago, jonpais said:

@Emanuel In the interview, Yosuke Yamane does say Panasonic developed the sensor. No mention of Sony. ? hmmm

Sometimes you get very complex arrangements around sensors. 

To give one very simplified example (actual reality could be even more complex!): One company will license a design, another company will extensively customise the design to develop the sensor for their own needs, then yet another company (a 3rd one) will be the one who actually physically manufactures the sensor. 

Any one of these three companies could describe the resulting product as "their sensor" if they wished to (and their contract allowed them to). 

 .

18 hours ago, zerocool22 said:

Yeah the downside to this is that you have to use their software. I would love to see a plugin for resolve.

Hopefully if they get popular enough we'll see plugins. 

The perpetual question for the ages: insane lowlight or crazy DR?

19 hours ago, Damphousse said:

That was a great bit of reporting I guess Kai, TCSTV, Gordon Laing, Wex Photo, CRFTSHO, Peter Gregg, Photo by Richard, Dan Watson, Max Yuryev, Three Blind Men and an Elephant, Art of the Image, Photo Joseph and Max Yuryev didn't have the journalistic skills to deliver to their audiences.

Most (but not quite all) of those guys are photographers, is it any wonder they get it wrong when they review a camera which is first a video camera? (and only secondarily a stills camera) Most photographers don't have a bloody clue how to do video right! (yet they still do it anyway unfortunately.... as their clients are asking them for it) Thus you see such total unbelievable nonsense in reviews such as saying increasing the shutter speed will reduce rolling shutter!!! wtf

This is why when extrashot (who *ARE* videographers) made a comment about a sound feature (the TC) of the GH5S, that I'm feeling skeptical that Panasonic really did screw it up that bad, and instead the reviewers just got it wrong. Because they're commenting about an aspect which is far outside their area of specialist expertise. 

18 hours ago, Damphousse said:

That's not how cannibalization works.  Any manufacturer would be happy if people passed on their lower priced offering and bought the higher priced product.

Hilarious to think about a company being worried a more expensive product (GH5S) will canabalize their cheaper product! (GH5)

LOL

20 hours ago, Jn- said:

TC has issues ... see from about 13 min. in ...

http://extrashot.co.uk/panasonic-gh5s-first-hands-on-review/

I posted about that a while ago. My desperate hope is the reviewers don't know what the hell they're talking about (which is very very likely!). 

5 hours ago, PannySVHS said:

Exellent point! I was hoping to get one of these elegant beautiful cameras for a small price, so to say as a poor mans Digital Bolex. But it would have to be the other way around, the Digital Bolex being the 2K 24p version of a poor mans AJA:)

Don't the AJA Cions still sell secondhand for a lot more than a secondhand URSA Mini 4K would? Which is my preferred option over it. 

3 hours ago, Fritz Pierre said:

Interesting fact in the discussion on DR and the manufacturer's DR chart posted a few pages back...the Red 1 was rated buy Red to have 13 stops of DR but after being used by DPs for a few months, was assessed at a more realistic 9.5 to 10 stops....Steven Soderburg and David Fincher started using them immediately so this can also put the DR argument to bed re image quality in the right hands..

And yet people will complain over and over about a camera having 12 stops of DR instead of 14+, and call it "not a cinema camera because the DR is too low"

You're tempting me @Cinegain to use that downvote for a 2nd time! ;-)

44 minutes ago, Snowfun said:

There are times when a high ISO makes a genuine difference - I’m not interested in the GH5s until Sony have confirmed what they might do with the A7s3 (or I persuade myself that I can afford a C200).

If you wait until the a7Smk3 is announced (which who knows is when... might not even be this year! Maybe. Maybe not) then you will have to wait for the GH6 which is just around the corner... but after that comes out, you'll wonder if you should wait for the GH6S? But then after the GH6S, perhaps wait and see what happens with the a7Smk4? And so the cycle never ends...

You are thinking of the new Osmo which is $129

However:
"Pricing hasn’t been set for the Ronin-S"

No way will it be $129 as well!

Just now, webrunner5 said:

Yeah a Sony F3 is a Wide ass camera. I think it has a beautiful shape to it.

I wish it was EVA1/C100/FS5 form factor however. 

1 minute ago, mercer said:

Iron, may I call you Iron, it seems like you are creating unrealistic scenarios to defend your position. I read your DOF argument the first time and it’s just... unrealistic... if you’re shooting in extremely low light, you will do what you have to do to get the exposure... faster lens and then step back to get the focus you want. It wouldn’t be ideal but that is the circumstance you are in... otherwise you would bring in lights and then the a7s would still have a two stop advantage.

You can call me David if you wish :-) Or Iron! Or IronFilm! Don't care :-P

As I've said many times, a7S doesn't have an overall two stop advantage. Sensor tech / processing matters far more. 

You're talking about an extreme scenario where it is "do anything to get the shot", such as opening up wider with the F stop (and wider focal length too perhaps), and changing the entire lighting scheme. 

I'm talking here from a practical scenario that commonly happens on film sets over and over again all around the world. 

There is a creative choice in the DoF that is picked which is appropriate for the story to be told and the director's vision (so DoF is then fixed, or at least the "DoF range", unless you get *forced* off it due to technical/logistical issues), how you achieve that with a 4/3" sensor or a Vista Vision one doesn't really matter in the long run. You just then select appropriate lenses to then achieve this. 

But my additional point, is that in this selection of lenses for that chosen DoF, you put on the back foot when using an a7S vs GH5S (or a S35 camera) as you'll have to set the lens now to a higher F stop. 

20 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

I wonder how the cheap DJI mirrorless stabilizer works on a GH5s? The 129 dollar one.

That is for phones / action cameras. Not mirrorless/DSLR

9 minutes ago, Nathan Gabriel said:

Sorry I don't keep up on all of the camera specs. DPreview says the GH5s can do 10-bit 4:2:2 internal capture at up to 30p. Could the GH5 do that already, or is internal 10-bit 422 new? Thanks for your help!

Original GH5 was the first ever stills camera to do 10bit internal. 
GH4 was first with 10bit external. 

6 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Yeah i found that out in the Collage small town I live in with the AF100 LoL. I was stampeded. Eh I think those days are changing though.

Not often, but sometimes during the year I will have people who prefer to shoot with me because I own the F3 than a teeny lowbudget DSLR

Strange but true, I could even have a GH5S! But wouldn't be mattering. 

Ah well. 

Plus even myself personally, I do like shooting with it! XLR inputs and built in ND filters, plus all the quick easy access buttons and dials on it, really is a nice shooting experience which no DSLR/mirrorless quite has yet. 

When I shot a NYE party a few days ago I shot most of it with the F3. Only switching over the D5200 when the crowds on the dancefloor got so jam packed I had no space to move around with the big camera!

1 minute ago, mercer said:

So for the sake of this discussion, deep DOF is kind of irrelevant... because if you were forced to shoot in very low light, you would shoot with the fastest lens you could find and step further back to get the focus.

DoF does matter (note I am not saying "deep DoF", just saying "DoF"). Put yourself in the shoes of a DoP, and read again carefully what I wrote:
 

You can not simply "shoot with the fastest lens you have", that might not be appropriate for the scene or the story you're telling. 

Neither can you simply step back for a wider shot, as again that shot tells something different, and it won't be what you had in mind for the story. 

Thus to match DoF with what you chose for the scene, then with the a7S you need higher ISO setting to maintain exposure, which puts the a7S on the back foot vs a GH5 (or even a S35 camera). 

9 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Looks like it is a good time to sell your Sony F3 IronFilm!

The Sony F3 is worth so little that there is no point selling it. And having a big "cinema camera" in the eyes of some people can have its benefits too, that a DSLR will never quite do :-/ Sad but true. 

Just now, mercer said:

Like @webrunner5 has already said, how often are you going to shoot in crazy lowlight for a scene without either bringing in lights, or using good available light?

I agree crazy high ISO is silly, but good clean 3200 or 6400? Fantastic. 

It means you can shoot faster with less lights:
 

2 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

I would imagine it goes both ways. That is why there is so many wires in HDMI cables.

No, you can not feed TC into a camera via HDMI. 

I am sure it technically could be done. But it has never happened, simple does not exist on any camera in the world. 

10 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

If you have ever been on a movie set they are 50 Lights everywhere with 25 bounce boards. It is not a one man band. There is a reason the Credits at the end is nearly as long as the movie LoL.

Is more than just bounce boards, also cutters/floppies/scrims/etc

9 minutes ago, mercer said:

I thought we were talking a7s, why bring an almost 10 year old camera into the discussion? Of course, sensor technology and processing will be better 10 years later. Listen, I think what Panasonic has done with the GH5s is amazing. It looks really good in lowlight but let’s not get hyperbolic here. What the a7s can do with a single candle is near miraculous.

I brought it in because sometimes you need to take it step further with an analogy for a person to really get the hang of it. 

As you are subconsciously realizing, it is not about twice as much light hitting the sensor, but how that light is then USED!

For instance with the "sensor technology and processing", as you said so yourself ;-)

This is where the GH5S is doing very very well indeed. 

1 hour ago, webrunner5 said:

I find the Line in input very interesting also. Yeah TC for a Audio guy is sort of a Big thing LoL. AND TC works through the HDMI cable out also I heard on the Camera TV Store live thingy.

Yeah but you very rarely want TC out vs how often you want TC in!

TC out over HDMI doesn't even count as "having TC".