markr041

Thank you. Some minor WB adjustments in some clips and luminance and contrast tweaks only.

Here are two 4K videos I shot, in very different places. Listen to the audio on the first - the natural sound track.

I agree completely, but why not address that to the name of the person doing it, if you are going to intervene. And please distinguish between name calling (ad hominem statements), and characterizations of arguments (e.g. one may say a statement is ignorant or even the person is ignorant in making the statement or about something specific (a camera), but not the person is an ignoramus or stupid (or a "dodo"!)).

What is not cool about the post just above yours?

Fact with no commentary: Here are the announced original prices of the X3000: https://***URL removed***/news/7768580959/sonys-new-flagship-fdr-x3000-action-cam-shoots-stabilized-4k-video Here are today's prices: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1278151-REG/sony_fdr_x3000_action_camera.html This links to the specs of the X3000: http://www.sony.com/electronics/actioncam/fdr-x3000-body-kit/specifications There it says the effective pixels for stills and video is 8.2 megapixels, Steady Shot off (because Steady Shot is EIS and uses pixels). Thus, 1. There has been no price reduction for the X3000 since its introduction, other than the planned and limited-time Official Sony Holiday Sale that applied to almost all Sony products. I have the holiday brochure if anyone doubts this. 2. The small number of pixels, and rectangular sensor shape specialized for video shooting, is indeed why the pixels are larger on the X3000 compared to all other action cams with similar, but more squarish, sensor sizes, and contributes to why its low-light IQ is better, as confirmed in review.

I have responded to you statements about the cameras above. I hope that this time you will understand the facts better.

What complete nonsense. Every statement here is without any basis or just plain wrong. 1. You believe the Sony was overpriced, which is irrelevant. In any case there is no price reduction. The selling price now is the same at introduction. Look it up. 2. There is a lot wrong with EIS, requiring a crop of the sensor and reduced resolution among other issues - artifacts. 3. It is preposterous to say that BOSS was implemented because it "CANNOT do EIS". First, BOSS is superior to EIS and second - read slowly here - the SONY also does EIS (should I repeat that?) - that is what "Active" mode for stabilization is, a combination of EIS and BOSS. You can turn EIS off and just do BOSS. No one in their right mind would do EIS instead of BOSS. It is obvious you know nothing about the Sony. Active mode stabilization has been a feature of Sony's big camcorders for years. 4. You do not understand why Sony chose a "curiously (to you) rectangular" sensor because you do not understand aspect ratios. Sony chose a sensor shape so that there would be few wasted pixels for 16:9 video; the sensor size corresponds to the 16:9 picture size. It is the standard 4:3 sensor (like on GoPro's and Yi's) that wastes a lot of pixels for 16:9 video. "Rectangular" 16:9 is the aspect ratio of video. Pixels would be wasted for 4:3 stills, but this is a video camera. 5. Sony chose to "only" put 8.2 megapixels on the sensor to maximize pixel size while keeping the sensor size small - it is the number of pixels corresponding to 4K (UHD) video. This is why the Sony has superior low-light performance compared with other action cams, which pack 11+ megapixels on a similarly small sensor - bigger pixels, which absorb more light, means better low-light quality. Because of 4 and 5, the X3000 is a not a good stills camera, it is designed for 4K video. Btw, the sensor and processor are exactly the same as in the Sony AX53 4K BOSS camcorder - the X3000 is essentially a miniature AX53. Your final, desperate, argument is essentially - if the Sony is so good why is it not dominating the market? Your ignorant rant is an example for why, as it is similar to others. Evidently most people do not understand video and the features of the X3000. Oh, and your belief the processor of the Sony is inferior is belied by the fact that the Sony processor can do 120 fps in 1080 (with stabilization), while the Yi can only do 120 fps at 720p - 4K60p is a real advantage, however, although the lack of any stabilization for that frame rate severely limits its use.

The new cam does 120 fps, but only at 720p resolution. The Sony X3000 does 120 fps at 1080. Not amazing. There is no image stabilization at all in 4K 60p. Not amazing. And any stabilization for the lower rates is electronic and image-degrading. All cameras and most cellphone cameras now have optical or better stabilization, and the Sony X3000 has BOSS, among the best in-camera stabilization systems, which do not degrade. So, not amazing. 4K 60p is amazing; after that nothing new. But definitely better than the GoPro.

Here is what the VLog L clip (frame grab) looks like when one uses the official Panasonic REC709 LUT.

Thanks. We and they certainly have enough lead time!

Ok, so we can conclude that the 10bit files from the GH5 cannot be edited in DaVinci Resolve on any computer (my graphics card is the gtx 1050, so it is not the problem).

This could be. But if so, it is big news that the 10bit files from the GH5 are right now practically unusable. I have no problem editing other videos that are 10bit and that use H264, however (like XAVC intra (4:2:2 10bit)).

No, PC.

I have edited mov and mp4 files from my GH4 with no problems. And, I have no problem with the 60p files that were supplied from the GH5. If the 4K 30p files are straight from the camera, then the GH5 has a big problem. So, let's get a response from the supplier about the provenance of these files,

Can we please have some clarification about these files? I was under the impression that these downloadable files were straight from the GH5. But the inability to play or edit three of them (24p, 30p) in almost any player/editor (or the need to re-wrap) suggests that they are not straight from camera. More than one person has reported this, and we are not beginners at video. Can't work with them in Resolve, really? Some info please?

I am on a PC and I have almost exactly the same experience. I can work with the 60p files, but no software I have can open or play the 30p and 24p files (I have DaVinci 12.5 and Magix Vegas 14. MediaInfo indicates these are normal H264 files, but they are unreadable. There is obviously something wrong with these files.

What is the codec? Bitrate without codec info is meaningless. Some Canons do over 500 Mbps, but in MJpeg!

"Nice, what was your exposure? ETTR? or under by 2/3?" Thanks. ETTR.

I offer this to show what the official Panasonic LUT produces in terms of color from its VLog. Shot AWB, Vlog (10bit ProRes 422 HQ In the Shogun) with the Panasonic LUT applied in Resolve with no tweaking of color at all: And, yes, there are skin tones too.

The GX85 does very well in night shots. The ISO ranged from 1000 to 2500. The green moving dinosaur head shot was 2500; the close-ups of the snow man were 2500. Everything was really dark.

Ok, tired of radical in-camera settings and attempts to make Panasonic images look like those from other cameras? Want to see the default images the camera delivers with no adjustments in post, at night, with the Nocticron? No, well happy holidays anyways:

This is a real slow motion test: Indoor sports shot in 1080 120p and 1080 240p - all slo mo highlights of a basketball game. For this, you really need the fast lens, due to the high shutter speeds required for slow motion and the dim light of most indoor sports facilities: Yes, it is the RX100 IV, but the specs are really the same as the V, except you can take longer (and more boring) HFR shots with the new model.

"You can do 4K@60 with 4:4:4 8bit, or you can do 4K@60 with 4:2:0 10bit". It appears we are both wrong (I got my specs originally from Wikipedia). It looks like you can do 4K@60 10bit 4:2:2. From your link: Yes. HDMI 2.0 includes support for BT.2020 Colorimetry with 10 or more bits of color depth. Video Formats defined in BT.2020 and supported by HDMI 2.0 specification: – 2160p, 10/12 bits, 24/25/30Hz, RGB/4:2:2/4:4:4 – 2160p, 10/12 bits, 50/60Hz, 4:2:0/4:2:2 Since few cameras output 4:4:4, having a TV with 4K@60 10bit 4:2:2 capability with REC2020 would appear perfectly fine to monitor for editing HDR video. I would expect the forthcoming GH5 will output 4K@60 10bit 4:2:2, since the GH4 outputs 4K@30p 4:2:2 10bit.

"I would love to be corrected but it is my understanding that you cannot do all those three things at the same time over HDMI but you can over DisplayPort (which is not available for this model)". Here is your correction: HDMI 2.0 spec does all those things: UHD, 4:4:4, 60P, 10bit, REC2020 (wide gamut).

I do not see why a computer monitor for video editing should be IPS - you sacrifice dynamic range (deep blacks) and you are very close straight on to the screen - you are not looking at a sharp angle. You want good DR, not viewing angles. The best 43" 4K HDR TV is the Sony XBR 43X800D. It is VA. For HDR you need the triluminous pixels (like the quantum dots of Samsung), the wide color gamut, 60p, 4:4:4 and 10 bit, and it has all that. It is $599. AFAIK no other 43" or below has the necessary HDR features of this one. http://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/by-size/40-42-43-inch/best