LPG

Andrew, glad to see you continuing for the moment! Do not give up!

Ok guys, if you want to see a very special article on m43rumors, just look at this one:

https://www.43rumors.com/more-gh5ii-coverage-with-size-comparisons/

I believe that clickbait site is run by an Italian...

When reading through the comment section I got the giggles...

This is a masterpiece!

A kind of Fellini for nerds...

Yes, it IS a great lens and a great system...

Even Toneh had to admit this recently when he shot with this lens on the GH5-II... He now says it is the best vlogger combi on the market...

According to him Panasonic finally fixed the CAF on that camera…

It is clear that unsubstantiated one-liners do get him a lot of clicks!

Furthermore he is firmly within the group that doesn't understand equivalence.

Yes, it behaves like a 20-50 mm in FF terms, and yes it has the bokeh of a 3.4 FF lens, but as aperture is concerned, it DOES behave as a 1.7 as far as the exposure triangle (aperture - shutterspeed - iso) is concerned. Not as a 3.4 lens! How unfortunate that Toneh doesn’t understand this…

People get confused by the fact that the light-gathering of this 1.7 lens is lower than with a 1.7 FF lens, but that is of course relative to the sensor size. On a MFT sensor you need less light to cover the sensor.

This actually means that you gain nearly two stops compared to a FF 2.8 lens, and this handily does make up the ISO disadvantage that MFT has compared to FF.

As to bokeh, it is very dependent on the type of footage one shoots. For my line of work, I am in 95% of the cases perfectly fine with the bokeh of a 1.7 aperture on MFT. Having a shallower depth of field can easily become tricky. My 42.5 mm 1.7 gives me a gorgeous look in the right balance of shallowness. If I want a real FF look, I reach for my 1.2 Sigma zoom (with speedbooster) or my excellent (sharp!) 0.95 17mm Mitakon.

Only if one needs extrem bokeh, a FF camera with a 1.4 lens will be the better choice.

The 10-25 1.7 zoom is really tack sharp, and it even outperforms most primes in this range.

I will be curious to see whether they can make the announced 25-50 1.7 zoom optically as good as this one…

7 hours ago, KnightsFan said:

To offer the counter argument, I always shoot H.265. With a Ryzen 3600 and GTX 1080, I edit 4k 10 bit H.265 for every project and only get dropped frames on Fusion composites--which incidentally drop frames on ProRes as well! Fusion's integration into Resolve is still wildly inefficient.

In side by side comparisons on my camera, H.265 outperforms ProRes HQ, at <1/7th the data rate.

Side note, I was talking to someone on a shoot where they estimated 24 TB of footage (Redcode). That's going to cost them $650 in hard drives for one copy, $1300 to have a backup. If I were shooting it, I'd shoot 100 mbps H.265 and needed $300 of drives. For that extra $1000, I could get top of the line graphics card--okay, maybe not during the great GPU shortage--to cut through the footage easier... and if necessary I'd use proxies. I've saved $5k+ of hard drives in the last four years by shooting H.265 instead of ProRes, and come out with better quality as well.

 

That said, the Braw files that I have worked with also had a fantastic quality/size ratio, so I would certainly consider Braw above any flavor of ProRes.

Interesting!  I would love to hear Andrew's opinion!

12 hours ago, Yannick Willox said:

5 cam in 4K with previews running, plus programme ? Which PC do you have then ? I cannot do that in my Ryzen 5950X machine ... Not at smooth 25 fps.

I can do that zith braw. braw is more compact than prores at same quality levels. If I have a multicam shoot, and there is a GH5s running, it is like 200 GB for the GH5s (on 150mbit, not on 400 mbit codec !), and about 300 GB for braw Q5, same resolutions. So, braw is more performant and actually more compact, because for the gh5s I need to create proxies.

Yes, on my AMD 3950  with RTX 2060 Super it does run relatively smooth in Resolve, not so smooth in Premiere Po. I have got 64 Gb RAM and of course fast PCI SSDs. If you add some taxing grades, multiview becomes problematic, but that is my later stage anyway...

Thanks guys for your thoughts on ProRes. Food for thought. Interesting to hear that BRAW is such a good alternative.

Yes, I know that ProRes still holds a firm grip in the professional world, but that might also be a case of old habits slowly die... 

I was just curious to know from others whether they still think that the advantage of less burden on the CPU/GPU  was greater than the disadvantage of gigantic data rates and file sizes. As it is, I find archiving already a very taxing job...

4 hours ago, Yannick Willox said:

Try editing and color correcting 8 cam live shoots with compressed codecs ...

yes, archival is a problem, but highquality h264 is not that much more compact than braw.

 

Hi Yannick, up till now I have worked with up to 5 cams, and that went smoothly.

I agree that somewhere there must be a turning point where h264 becomes slow and Prores remains doable, but at that point gigantic data traffic of Prores will also become a burden?

I have no experience with braw... Is it s good compromise between IQ and data efficiency?

17 minutes ago, newfoundmass said:

Prores is still much nicer to edit than .264 and .265. The quality gap has gotten smaller though, so I never bothered to get an external recorder for my GH5. Generally I hate external recorders anyway. Still I'd prefer ProRes over h.264/265, though I don't think we'll ever see it adopted by any of the major camera manufacturers due to licensing. As far as data size, have you considered ProRes LT? 

Yes, I have tried the lighter flavours as well, but as soon as I stepped down on the scales of Prores I found the quality lacking and well under the h264/h266 codecs...  Maybe I am missing something?

It could be that very complex gradings might benefit from Prores, but up till now, I didn't 3xperience any problems with my new hardware. Resolve is extremely fast, even with a rather modest AMD 3950 and RTX2060 GPU. I agree that a couple of years ago 4k in h264 was a pain, but nowadays I have the impression that the extra storage demands of Prores slow down the process more than the handling of h264...

On 5/20/2021 at 5:22 PM, BTM_Pix said:

Like the original Pocket6K, there is a far bigger argument for it having an MFT mount.

You can still have electronic control of EF lenses with non-speedboosted adapters, you can have a windowed mode for the native MFT electronic lenses, the manual MFT lenses like Voigtlander and Meike etc all cover the s35 sensor and of course, with the shallower mount, you are able to put PL mount lenses on it.

It makes it a lot more sense for P4K owners to upgrade to/replace/augment their setups as well.

Like JVC found though, trying to undo the pre-conceived notion of the relationship between the mount size and the sensor size being absolute is a bit of a tough sell.

To be fair, Blackmagic also have their higher end cameras with EF mount so from the point of view of the Pocket6K being a B cam for those it makes sense.

I'd be interested to know from which direction the majority of the Pocket6K sales are coming though, as A cams for Pocket4K/new owners or B cams for Ursa owners.

Going the sidefinder route like Sigma have with the Fp so that all three flavours of Pocket could have had benefited from the new EVF would have been nice.

 

 

Yes, few people realize that the MFT mount enables a somewhat larger sensorsize than most MFT cameras use. I became aware of this with the GH5s, because it's sensor has a considerably larger size than the the standard GH5, resulting in a much wider image in lenses. In fact it seems to be somewhere in the middle between m43 and apsc...

It would be great to have more cameras with a variable use of sensor surface being used. That way we would be much more flexible when using manual lenses and with or without ibis...

Andrew, it's great to see you posting more reviews on cameras again, because that's where you're good at. Critical views on gear without all the PR humbug that other sites quote from the manufacturer...

I do have one question. You still seem very fond of Prores, and you said you would like to have that on the new GH6 as well. I have Prores (and the DNX formats) on my Atamos Ninja Inferno, but nowadays I hate to use them...

My point is that these codecs seem obsolete to me. They take up extreme amounts of storage space, and to my eye don't really have an edge on h264 and h265 with higher bitrates. I understand that they were very welcome a couple of years ago since they weren't CPU and GPU hungry, but is that still an advantage nowadays when CPUs and GPUs have become so powerful? On my latest desktop and laptop I think that these low compression codecs have become even slower because of the gigantic storage burden. Then there is also the huge problem of archival space. Two hours of footage fills up my 2TB ssd on my Atomos... When working on multicamera shots of classical concerts, I am literally buried under data!

Maybe your experiences are different? I can imagine that if one does short films or commercials, the data flood is less of a problem? Do you still experience a higher quality image with Prores versus high bitrate 264/265?

I am curious to hear your thoughts...

I do a lot of concert videos of classical music, and it is vital for me to have camera's that can run unattended for one or two hours. The GH5 is still one of the very few hybrids that can do exactly that. With a battery grip it can record for nearly 3 hours and I have never had any heating problem.

For run-and gun it is also still an excellent camera with its great Ibis, very good handling and bulletproof design.

Yes, the AF is nowadays its weak spot, but after all the updates and with some native lenses it is much better than some would suspect. In critical situations, one learns how to use it or not to use it.

I would like to have the AF of a Sony or Canon, but it is still no deal breaker for me.

The whole ecosystem is another reason why I am still very much in love with M43. Besides a wonderful and vast array of lenses by Panasonic and Olympus, we now have an ever expanding range of third party lenses. My latest acquisition (a wonderful and incredibly well performing  Mitakon 17 mm F0.95 lens) is giving me a whole new playing field.

I do follow the developments with Canon, Nikon, Sony and Fuji, but I still see a lot of disadvantages when switching to one of these. I agree that AF, DR and lowlight capabilities are no small feats, but there are other factors as well, and I don’t want to gain on some aspects and loose in a bunch of others.

Today I saw that new video by “Three Blind Men and An Elephant Productions”. Funny enough he reached the same conclusions. It is easy to get blinded by all those shiny features of the new FF bodies, and forget the blessings of what one already owns.

Hi Andrew, this is exactly the kind of information people are looking for. Just a clear view on the pros and cons... You see why we don't want you to abandon EOSHD? Keep up the good work!

Andrew, please don't quit!

I have learned so much on this blog.

I know we live in a thoroughly controlled and commercialised world, and it is frustrating to see the commercial chaps dominate the scene. It is indeed ridiculous that Panasonic doesn't send you a GH5, but it is also understandable and maybe even a compliment! The industry likes smooth guys for reviewing and one could accuse you of all kind of things, but a smooth guy you're not!

Therefore it is vital that guys like you and Gordon of Cameralabs and others who share a passion and an independent mind won't give up. Gordon adds a paypal link for buying him a cup of coffee, and I think thats a great solution.

Why don't you add links to Buy me a beer? You live in Germany, so that seems quite appropriate. It would cover some of your costs and enable you to buy or rent the equipment and continue writing in an independent way.

BTW I do like John of Cinema5d. He seems to be symphatetic and he doesn't feel too snobby to test some consumer stuff.

I hope you'll find ways to continue Eoshd!

Yes, this is a beautiful camera indeed. A friend of mine has the T1. I like everything about Fuji, except that their lenses are big and expensive... Will wait for the GH5 because of the whole ecosystem. For studio work this is no problem, but I do not go back to bulky systems when outdoors.

It all depends on the way you pursue these offences. If the guy get lynched, you would be right. If he gets a fair chance to defend himself, there is nothing wrong with pursueing him for his offences.

Indeed, a society where these offences are being pursued in a fair way is a much better place than a society that does not care.

How can you uphold that his previous incidents are irrelevant to this specific discussion?

You seem to be deeply upset by the verb to lie... That seems reasonable enough, but it is petty work compared to the insults done by that chap Clarkson... You rightfully demand to be treated with respect, but you don't mind Clarkson abusing others?

I had high hopes for this camera, but when I learned that it has no EVF I became hesitant.

Thanks, Andrew, for showing us all the other deficits. It saves me a lot of time. This camera is too troublesome for 4k video. The LX100 is definitely of more use.

My only hope is that Sony will come with a kind of A7000 that does 4k in a good way, but all the rumours so far have turned out to be false...

I was not thinking of royalty, noblemen or any of that sort. They usually were not the spiritual elite I was thinking of. English society was for  a very long time known for its sophisticated manners. It may be true that underneath that surface there were a lot of less sophisticated ethics, but nowadays we seem to have the worst of both; thugs all around and no polite cueing at the post office...

At the heart of Andrews argument probably lies a kind of resentment towards poitical correctnes, that can be used by powerful bureaucrats to weed out any creativ process that does not comply with the mainstream. I can understand his argument, and all people within the arts will probably recognize this, but I am not sure he has chosen the right example here, or maybe he is just so fond of cars, that he saw no other way to rescue his favourite show.

That Jeremy guy is just a rather spoiled and ill mannered chap that one can find on every streetcorner. Why turn him into a martyrer or saint? There must surely be some other guy around on those isles who can step in and do his job without all the hassle? Or is the subject of cars connected to adolescent behaviour by default?

Is that your BBC upbringing...?

Maybe no need to quit this site and Andrew's good work. I also don't agree with his tolerance for racist remarks, but there's nothing wrong with a good argument. Having a good argument is one of the good old English virtues we should uphold at any cost, I think.

Interesting! While we share the history of slave trade and colonization, in our society it is not so consciously associated to the upper class. Maybe the social divisions within England were a bit more outspoken. 

Elitism seems to be a dreaded notion, nowadays, but there were times when also the idealists among socialist movements strived for education, enlightment and good behaviour. 

I guess your remark on the oxbridge society has some truth, but does it validate the strive for vulgarity and bad taste so evidentl in display in programs like Top Smear?

Here in the Netherlands, we do admire British humor very much. If the n-word is being used in a Monthy Python sketch, its use is being ridiculed within its setting. Within the top gear environment its use has a totally different meaning. 

It is interesting to note the feeling among english people that their history of politeness and straight jackets nowadays feels like a burden from the past. On a visit to Bradford I was struck by the display of deliberate vulgarity in society. It seems as if the former middle-class has decided to join the ranks of lower society, just to escape any resemblance to the ever dwindling upper-class that has been for centuries the model for traditional British values, but nowadays is regarded as stiffening, reactionary, boring, corrupted relics from the past... Is there any middle class left in the UK, I asked myself?

I think a guy like Jeremy is a strange combination of all the bad elements of both. He has the rough edges of lower class behaviour, while living the life of the rich and spoiled Englishman that could get away with everything because of his standing in society. This makes for a highly unpleasant and proposterous character, that however seems to strike a chord with present day British society. Its vulgariy seems to be understood as humour and it apparently serves people for getting rid of the straight jacket, just like getting tattoos shows others that you have left behind these typically English manners?

Clarkson's behaviour is very much in line with the content of the program itself. Is is predominantly a show that wants to appeal to an audience that is for some reason fed up with values from the past. The good old England with people cueing politely, using polite words, accepting social discrepancies without complaint, is being by seen as an welcome relic from the past, hindering the individual and its creativity.

I guess that Andrews irritation is partly due to the BBC standing up  for those old values. Maybe this is more of a conflict between these competing worlds, and the divisions it has left in British society. Correctness is apparently seen as a burden, and a false argument associated with the old boys from Cambridge and Oxford...