John Matthews

I'm enjoying this thread more than ever. Maybe by rubbing some neurons together we'll be able to spark GX80/85 settings that look as "filmic" as possible. This is fairly subjective; so, let's try to identify what we're after. This is what I'm after in order of importance: minimize macro blocking artifacts in the red, green, and blue channels induced by the codec processing maximize DR maximize color information in the red, green, and blue channels minimize noise in the red, green, and blue channels maximize detail Some of these are related, but do you have other ideas, or in terms of what order? The goal for me is a 4k image that looks organic and that I can tweak. I KNOW that what Panasonic gave us as default settings look like bad 1080p, especially noise reduction. I realize that 4:2:0 is best dealt with in-camera; however, I don't always want to decide on the final look AS I'M FILMING- that simply asks too much of us amateur filmmakers.

Please show us what you're getting... for you to have such a knee-jerk reaction, it must be good! Seriously, we could all benefit from what others think the best way to use the GX80 is rather than making it a echo chamber.

Thank you for finally commenting more on what seems to be one the most popular EOSHD threads since starting your forum. We're all eager to hear your settings... possibly even willing to even pay for them... I believe the consensus (in this thread) was indeed the ones I said above: Standard or Natural (-5,-5,-5,0), many of us commenting on A3G3 WB adjustments. Your contention is the contrast setting... IMO lowering the contrast minimized the hot spots found on skin and other situations. I'm interested in what you have to offer. Maybe you can shoot some video and tell us what you think like your recent Sony video which I found very instructive. Many of us have been asking for a long time for your input.

The general consensus is either Natural or Standard with everything at "-5" with the exception of saturation, which should be set at "0." For WB, I use "Sunny," adjusted to A3G3. In my tests, the Natural profile performed a little better in the blue channel. The reason for keeping saturation at "0" is due the codec being 4:2:0, resulting in limited color information in the first place. Hope that helps.

I'm going to get one, but I still think there's going to be some trial and error. I just tried it. Flicker decrease is only available in Photo mode. Upon pressing the movie record, it jumps to 1/50 and nothing is adjustable after... no shutter, no aperture, no ISO, and no exposure comp.

Thank you so much for that help. Since I was at 5600K and A0M4, I'll try to add a little more blue 5400K and A0M5. It should up the blue and remove a little more green. I'll give that a go.

This is only controlled light in a studio setting without any other shots. In fact, I have a fluorescent light behind a window and I'd like that light to be more like window light shining inside... if that makes sense.

WB suggestions for shooting under fluorescent lighting needed. What's the best procedure with the GX80 as I'm after skin color with no green? Should I just shoot with at grey card? Trial and error? So far, I've simply gone for 5600K and A0,M4 (WB), but it still seems a little off. Other settings are Standard Profile (-5,-5,-5,0).

Exactly where do you see more DR (which seems like the purpose of a flat profile)? Highlight spectacles on the car? More detail under the car? More detail in the grass? If you're shooting the GH4, why don't you get a proper flat profile like V-log?

It's 8bit 4:2:0. The previous remarks were concerning iDynamic high... I haven't tested low or standard. Again, I have my doubts about any difference in DR other than superficial slight modification of processing curves resulting in more noise and artifacts in dark areas. What does @Andrew Reid say, if anything, in his GH4 guide? DPreview did mention a slight gain in DR at the lower end and a generally lower midpoint in their LX100 review. This is probably what you're noticing. I have my doubts that Panasonic has changed anything concerning iDynamic since the GH4, LX100, G7, and probably the G80/85.

In my tests, the resulting red channel from the recorded video in FCPX had areas with no detail in iDynamic (high)... the same areas without iDynamic had more detail... just my observations. Again, if you like the result, that's ok. Besides, these are 4k images; it's not as if they lack detail anyway. IMO not all "flat" images are created equal.

My suspicion is that if you shoot people, the red channel will clip more easily, resulting in unnatural images. In the end though, if you like the image, then use it!

For me, the clipped highlights had harsher edges with iDynamic on. Standard made a more gradual clip. This was not your case?

So, I just did a quick test of ISO 200 (various combinations on Standard profile). I looked at green, blue, and red channels. My conclusions are: There's no additional information in highlights. Shadows in iDynamic are simply lifted, no more detail. Noise in shadows is much more prevalent in general with iDynamic. It seems the red channel suffers the most from iDynamic. My test were in high-contrast situations... so I could be wrong about outside, lower contrast, high-key situations, but I'm fairly certain anything low-key or with many dark colors one would be "better" with iDynamic off and graded in post. If you would like the midtones to be darker (which happens to me regularly), just lower them.

Do you mean to say it works better when there's enough light for ISO 200... or is it better in combination with an outside WB... or both? It's true that the lx100 video posted above was at ISO 800, not 200 and it had clearly less detail on the green blanket. Again, more testing/posts are needed.

Could you publish a quick test with these features on and off? I have some doubts concerning iDynamic based on previous tests (by other users) and previous Panasonic cameras (namely the LX100). It was concluded that there were numerous artifacts due to iDynamic. It's possible that Panasonic changed something, but I'd be surprised. Here's the LX100 (non-scientific) test:

Yeah. It looks like it has sold out in many places... often a true indicator that this camera is rather popular. Don't give up as something might show up. The same thing happened to me with the GX80 in the French market, but I found a French company that imported them from Germany. Now, they're everywhere.

@sanveer, that's a real bummer. You've got a faulty one for sure. Please report to us on how long it takes Panasonic to fix it so we can compare with other camera manufacturers.

Nice video. I noted 2 things though: 1. Crazy amounts of purple and green chromatic aberrations. 2. Strange motion cadence... I could see the frames. Possibly due to shutter speed choice? Most notably seen on the first shot of the gondola coming our from a bridge.

Here's a longer video describing the G80 after the firmware update 1.1. He says it's good, but maybe not quite as good as the GX80. Honestly, I can't tell. It's certainly "close enough."

I feel your pain. I think the A6500 launch was botched. It should have been in 2017. Between Sony and Apple, we can see the extremes of product timing. I'd actually prefer the Apple method to the Sony one. Sony needs to perfect their current features, get their cameras to run reliably, and invest in pro-level help. Unfortunately, I don't believe Sony is built that way... it's just the way it is. As for color, I think @Andrew Reid is simply saying he likes Canon's colors best. Don't feel bad if you have a Sony and you like the colors- it's all subjective anyway, as was clearly stated in The Camera Store TV video.

Yes... maybe, but why did they change it and market it was an upgrade to the GX80/85? I'm not getting that "upgrade" feeling. Is this just a case where a camera manufacturer launching a product that's not quite ready? It was the USP for the G80.

I don't think it's a question of expectation if that's what you meant. Although I believe expectations are too high with IBIS in general, this is more a question of behavior when panning and I guess it can only be described as a subtle "bounce" effect. Also, I'm not completely sure the GX80 wouldn't do something similar. At 400mm, it's a long way away for things to not go somewhat wrong.

That's too bad, but it was also my suspicion- the G80's IBIS problem isn't fixed with firmware version 1.1 with certain lenses according to 43rumors.com. I guess the GX80/85 is still top dog for Panasonic when it comes to IBIS. Hope the GH5 won't have that same issues as the G80/85.

I had a Pentax K5. Loved it... the best stills camera (in RAW) I've ever had. The video, not so much. I hear people complain about the 5DM4's Motion jpeg, the Pentax had similar problems and the DR wasn't so good. In fact, the modern Pentax's would be OK if they could just get their CODEC right... I'd probably still be using them if they had. I just gave up on them. Anyway, I think you're right about colors being VERY subjective. Then again, people on EOSHD seem only to prefer Canon and Fuji most of the time, but in fact, in terms of audience, their preference would probably be all over the place. As long as you're not shooting in log, someone will probably prefer the colors.