hyalinejim

Marty,
...the remark of Mike is the same of ours, just using his irony to let implicit the same friendly tone we are expecting from everyone here.

Yeah, looks great!!

some moving images for once. 

I guess if grouchy people didn't post on this forum there would be fewer posts to read. So it's a good thing, really.
Carry on!
🥸

Well now, that sucks. The GH5 was the first great consumer camera, in my view, and is not irrelevant today.
I moved from that to a GH6 and then S5ii within the last 12 months. Comparing GH5 to S5ii the only major differences for me are AF, 2 stops more in the highlights, and full frame versus 1.29x crop with Speedbooster. That's all. And my videos look basically the same as they did before.

Well now, that sucks. The GH5 was the first great consumer camera, in my view, and is not irrelevant today.
I moved from that to a GH6 and then S5ii within the last 12 months. Comparing GH5 to S5ii the only major differences for me are AF, 2 stops more in the highlights, and full frame versus 1.29x crop with Speedbooster. That's all. And my videos look basically the same as they did before.

This is great advice.

Please go ahead and "show" me that "No camera with IBIS can do this".
How will you show this?  By posting every clip ever shot with an IBIS camera?  What about the ones that were uploaded without providing camera model details?  What about the ones that were uploaded privately?  What about the clips that were shot but never uploaded at all?
How on earth can you "show" that your claim about IBIS cameras is correct?
Simple - you can't.
This is a claim that is impossible to make, impossible to test, impossible to even know.  Even if it is true now, it might not be true in 10 years time, so therefore it isn't true now because it will be invalidated in the future.
Let me be honest with you here.  You are receiving criticism here because you are talking outside of your knowledge, and criticising things that other people do.  
Had you said "Here, look at this footage, I think it's good" then no-one could criticise because that's your opinion.  Had you said that "I think it works well for the kind of things I shoot" then that's your opinion too.  Had you said "I think this would be useful for a number of other film-makers" then that's an opinion, but one that makes sense based on the fact that many other people shoot how you do.
But, you also say things that cannot ever be known, like "No camera with IBIS can do this".  
And, you also criticise the way that other people use their cameras, like "Seriously, guys. Overheating? Do you take long, boring takes from one position? That's what you shoot?".  
If you want to have a real discussion about cameras, then you need to follow these general principles:
Only speak definitively from your own perspective Don't speak about things that you don't know about Be open minded and humble about what you do and do not know The way you're currently posting makes you look like someone who loves their camera and doesn't want to hear any criticisms about it and will argue with people to try and invalidate their criticisms.
If you want people to respect you, you have to know your own limits and stick within them.
It is easy to make claims, like "No camera with IBIS can do this" for example, but to show that those aren't the type of claims that I like to make, here's a clip I shot with OIS only.
This is the whole clip, SOOC.  I just dragged it from my footage folder into YT.
The Sony X3000 action camera has a super-wide angle lens (something like 15-17mm equivalent) that has OIS built in.  This clip was shot with the OIS enabled, but without the in-camera EIS enabled.  
It's not the most stable clip I have shot, but it's not too bad.  I also need more practice.  Things to take into account:
I uploaded this clip because it didn't feature my friends and family and I don't post personal clips publicly This is a very wide angle lens and this submarine is actually a lot more cramped than it appears, and you can see that the floor isn't completely even or flat either, so I was walking carefully and trying not to bump into things (I'm also above 6' tall, so might have been ducking too - I can't remember) I definitely need more practice holding the camera steady The X3000 weighs practically nothing, the whole rig of camera + monitor + grip totals only 162g / 0.36lb so doesn't have the weight advantage of the Sony, which is probably 10-20 times heavier and has a much firmer grip than this (which you literally grip with one finger) I really hope that you will consider my comments and try to change how you post.  There are lots of people online, and on camera forums especially, who are posting for ego reasons, or trying to push some kind of agenda, and this always generates a negative response and arguments rather than genuine discussion where everyone comes away better off.

Yes, but have they shot weddings?

As a BM pocket user I’m not sure I even have “features” let alone enough to give them up…

Yes, 90 in one direction and 30 in the other, so even if the legs are on very uneven ground you can still level the horizon.

Yep, if you don't need AF then the S5II is a minor upgrade - possibly even a downgrade if you're concerned about sharpening in V-Log and other issues with standard profiles already mentioned in this thread.

There are two ways of adjusting it. You turn the knob to make fine adjustments. It's stiff, but that's good because it helps you to be precise.
If you need to turn it more than let's say 5 or 10 degrees, though, you would use the other way which involves turning the wavy looking ring thing (which is also quite stiff to turn, so slightly tricky). Then the head will move freely in that axis with no resistance. That's when you'd run into problems with a very heavy setup that isn't balanced - if you wanted to tilt with a front heavy setup then the whole thing will fall forward when you release the wavy thing.
Now, you can avoid all this by only using the fine adjustment but that takes a while. I just tested it there and it's 10 to 12 wrist rotations to turn 45 degrees.
If you were going to get this head then it would be worth figuring out a way to get the rig balanced on it.

If you absolutely promise that you won’t want to pan/tilt while recording then a geared head might well be the solution for you.
The venerable Manfrotto 410 will support up to around 5kg and won’t break the bank.

To expand on the above, here is a list of all the "layers" that I believe are in effect when creating an image - you are in effect "looking through" these items:
Atmosphere between the camera and subject Filters on the end of the lens The lens itself, with each element and coating, as well as the reflective properties of the internal surfaces Anything between the lens and camera (eg, speed booster / TC, filters, etc) Filters on the sensor and their accompanying coatings (polarisers, IR/UV cut filters, anti-aliasing filter, bayer filter, etc) The sensor itself (the geometry and electrical properties of the photosites) The mode that the sensor is in (frame-rate, shutter-speed, pixel binning, line skipping, bit-depth, resolution, etc) Gain (there are often multiple stages of gain, one of which is ISO, that occur digitally and in the analog domain - I'm not very clear on how these operate) Image de-bayering (or equivalent for non-bayer sensors) Image scaling (resolution) Image colour space adjustments (Linear to Log or 709) Image NR, sharpening, and other processing Image bit-depth conversions Image compression (codec, bitrate, ALL-I vs IPB and keyframe density, etc) Image container formats This is what gets you the file on the media out of the camera.  Then, in post, after decompressing each frame, you get:
Image scaling and pre-processing (resolution, sharpening, etc) Image colour space adjustments (from file to timeline colour space) All image manipulation done in post by the user, including such things as: stabilisation, NR, colour and gamma manipulation (whole or selectively), sharpening, overlays, etc Image NR, sharpening, and other processing (as part of export processing) Image bit-depth conversions (as part of export processing) Image compression (codec, bitrate, ALL-I vs IPB and keyframe density, etc) (as part of export processing) Image container formats (as part of export processing) This gets you the final deliverable.  Then, if your content is to be viewed through some sort of streaming service, you get:
Image scaling and pre-processing (resolution, sharpening, etc) Image colour space adjustments (from file to streaming colour space) All image manipulation done in post by the streaming service, including such things as: stabilisation, NR, colour and gamma manipulation (whole or selectively), sharpening, overlays, etc Image NR, sharpening, and other processing (as part of preparing the steam) Image bit-depth conversions (as part of preparing the steam) Image compression (codec, bitrate, ALL-I vs IPB and keyframe density, etc) (as part of preparing the steam) Image container formats (as part of preparing the steam) This list is non-exhaustive and is likely missing a number of things.  It's worth noting a few things:
The elements listed above may be done in different sequences depending on the manufacturer / provider The processing that is done by the streaming provider may be different per resolution (eg, more sharpening for lower resolutions for example) I have heard anecdotal but credible evidence to suggest that there is digital NR within most cameras, and that this might be a significant factor in what separates consumer RAW cameras like the P2K/P4K/P6K from cameras like the Digital Bolex or high-end cinema cameras ..and to re-iterate a point I made above, you must take the whole image pipeline into consideration when making decisions.  Failure to do so is more likely to lead you to waste money on upgrades that don't get the results you want.  For example, if you want sharper images then you could spend literally thousands of dollars on new lenses, but this might be fruitless if the sharpness/resolution limitations are the in-camera-NR or you might spend thousands of dollars getting a camera that is better in low-light when there is no perceptible difference after the streaming service has compressed the image so much that you have to be filming at ISO 10-bajillion before and grain is visible (seriously - test this for yourself!).

@deezid are you testing the 2.0 firmware for the S5II or this on the S5IIX?
If S5II firmware 2.0 is there any other good news you can share at this point?

OK @Andrew Reid or anyone else who may be interested, I have sussed it!
Spanner
Cog
Custom Mode Settings
How to reload custom mode
Change recording mode
OFF
Et voila, any/all custom modes that you have set, will always retain your most recent setting tweak.
I have all my Lumix cameras set up as:
C1 = outdoor stills with WB set at 5500
C2 = indoor stills (only difference is WB 4500 default over my outdoor settings) 
C3-1 = 6k 30p outdoor
C3-2 = 4k 60p outdoor
C3-3 = 4k 60p indoor
So if I say twiddle the WB in a certain scenario on one of my video settings and then flip to one of my stills modes and then flip back to video, it’s always whatever I was using last.
I’ve just tested to make sure and it works.
All my settings are not ‘final’ but more starting points or at least ‘safety nets’ so if I shot an entire sequence of video clips or stills at the wrong WB, at least there will be consistency for correction purposes.
The bottom line, is that familiarity of your kit in order that you can spend less time thinking about how to do something technically and focus more on the creative side.

Yes like I said (a lot of times 😅) the S5II uses nasty temporal noise and chroma noise reduction in low light with the 709 profiles even at -5, the difference with the S1 and S5 is stricking, especially on skin. There is also too much sharpening in 6K with these profiles, even at -5, it's night and day with the S1.
This is the first thing I noticed when I bought the S5II some months ago. Maybe (I'm not sure) the S1 and S5 use slight temporal noise reduction with the 709 profiles but it doesn't impact the details at all unlike the S5II.
Now I only use V-Log on the S5II because of the smearing and the over-sharpening of the 709 profiles, and I always overexpose by two stops like you did, it can change the colors and the highlights rendering a bit but this way it definitely gives lower noise, and like you said V-Log is free of smearing as long as you use 0 NR and 0 sharpness. 
Thank you for the Lut, I will try it.
Yes I hope Panasonic will fix the 709 profiles, for now I still use the S1 for low light but I miss the S5II AF.


 

Yes, you're right - it is! Natural looks wonderfully smooth in comparison. It must be doing some pretty serious temporal noise reduction, even with NR at -10... and on the S5 and S1 I would guess it's the same, but without the smearing and detail loss.
There is definitely an advantage to using the method I describe for V-Log. I checked, and V-Log ISO 25600 pulled 2.66 stops is cleaner than V-Log ISO 4000 (as long as NR is at 0). So for regular V-Log shooters it means that it's better to ETTR even going up to very high ISOs rather than sticking at, say, 4000 and leaving that highlight headroom empty.
4000:

 
25600 pulled down 2.66 stops:

And you @Beritar this pushing of V-Log right to its upper limit using ISO will give you cleaner footage than just using V-Log at the metered exposure. It will be not-as-clean as Natural (which may be unNaturally clean 😉) but it will be unsmeared.
 
Try this LUT for getting V-Log close-ish to Natural:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1gqigXKnLl8T2zT6KswA2ruLvG6bbqORc/view?usp=share_link
The colour isn't quite the same but the curve is.
Anyway, fingers crossed that these and other issues will be fixed in the 2.0 firmware update in June!

Not if you ignore the meter! V-Log at base ISO 640 is simply ISO 100 pushed 2.66 stops to give extra highlight headroom. If you push it back down it should be just as clean as the regular profiles at ISO 100.
So you don't need more light at all you need to re-think ISO and metering.
In a situation where you would have shot Natural at 6400 you would add 2.66 stops to the ISO and shoot V-Log at 40000, then push the exposure back down with the real time LUT.
You can make a lut like this right now with LutCalc:

And then you will have a Rec709 file with low noise and none of the artifacts (and none of the highlight headroom, but you won't need it because you're burning in the contrast)
Also, you're not limited to the V709 conversion (that curve is a bit weird IMO). You can try more contrasty curves in LutCalc, while keeping the gamut conversion. Or you can load up your favourite third party LUT, add the -2.66 exposure and re-export it.
PS: It looks like Exposure Offset Adjust (to re-calibrate the meter) is limited to 1 EV maximum so with that selected you'd be looking to hit +1.66 on the meter instead of +2.66. This would be your new "zero".
No light needed, just ISO. Of course above a certain level I think you lose PDAF?

Not if you ignore the meter! V-Log at base ISO 640 is simply ISO 100 pushed 2.66 stops to give extra highlight headroom. If you push it back down it should be just as clean as the regular profiles at ISO 100.
So you don't need more light at all you need to re-think ISO and metering.
In a situation where you would have shot Natural at 6400 you would add 2.66 stops to the ISO and shoot V-Log at 40000, then push the exposure back down with the real time LUT.
You can make a lut like this right now with LutCalc:

And then you will have a Rec709 file with low noise and none of the artifacts (and none of the highlight headroom, but you won't need it because you're burning in the contrast)
Also, you're not limited to the V709 conversion (that curve is a bit weird IMO). You can try more contrasty curves in LutCalc, while keeping the gamut conversion. Or you can load up your favourite third party LUT, add the -2.66 exposure and re-export it.
PS: It looks like Exposure Offset Adjust (to re-calibrate the meter) is limited to 1 EV maximum so with that selected you'd be looking to hit +1.66 on the meter instead of +2.66. This would be your new "zero".
No light needed, just ISO. Of course above a certain level I think you lose PDAF?

I have some more good news and spoiler alert: You may want to get the paid RAW update.

BRAW is now completely fixed it seems. No more sharpening, no more filtering and mushy textures.
Instead more texture, both luma and chroma than recording internally and at least 1-2 stops of more usable latitude since the shadow areas are clean now and highlight recovery seems to give one extra clean stop of highlight range.
 
BRAW with highlight recovery

 
Internal H265/H264/ProRes

This is why you're not seeing it. A baked in LUT uses V-Log as its base picture style so it avoids the nasties that are in the regular profiles.
I never use regular profiles so I don't care. But for anyone who does want to use them then a solution is to use this method. If you're after the lower noise of regular profiles then just create a lut that pushes V-Log down by 2.66 stops. And I think you can also set metering compensation.

Congratulations! It's a great camera! I love mine.

I just sold my S1 and have bought a S5mk2 with a Sigma 28-70 f2.8. They have them as a pack here in Spain for 2590€. Pretty happy with the deal. Only had time to set up the camera a check a few things. But there are 2 things that I think I'm really going to like, the ability to punch in and check focus whilst filming and the EVF, which isn't as good as the S1's but it's way better than the S5's. I'll have to learn how to use the AF but so far it look pretty good. The lens looks great, nice and compact. I can see it being my main lens. If also means my back pack will weigh less as I'll use the 24-105 less and the S5 is a lot lighter than the S1. All good so far!