John Matthews

Just a couple of thoughts... IBIS is only taking out my micro-jitters for me and offering a "gentle floating" to the video. If I move too much, you can see it. I can't walk and film really. Focus is always going to be a challenge- the GX80 will NOT autofocus on a moving subject if the camera itself is moving, manual focus is the only way. I agree that the marketing material is confusing and cagey at best. Nevermind the number of inquiries from us to know more about the HDMI port and codecs. They just don't answer. Nevertheless, I fully checked this out months ago before buying GX80. Andrew checked on this, along with countless reviewers to confirm 5-axis IBIS. My understanding of E-stabalization is that the camera takes a further crop, moving around the image on a X and Y axis on the sensor to further stabalize, meaning it's Hybrid 5-axis is 5-axis + extra stabalization (but it crops). Pitch and yaw would require sensor movements to compensate. I've never heard of software compensating for pitch and yaw. However, where do you see that "Body IBIS" is only 3-axis? I only read "normal" IBIS is "Camera shake is corrected for up/down, left/right, and rotational movements." On the face of that phrase, it sounds like 3-axis, but it never says that. Also, "rotational" can mean a lot. Given the confusion, I've come to believe that this is simply a poorly written manual, nothing else.

Have you tried comparing no IS and IBIS, never actually turning on the E-stabalization? If you see no difference, your device might be faulty.

I'll give Hybrid 5-axis a go and report back. IMO the GX80's IBIS is pretty good, taking out almost all the micro-jitters, which is what you really want anyway. Does it replace a tripod? No, but I'm sure if you turn off IBIS altogether, you'll notice a huge difference.

Not sure how the A7II works, but the Panasonic is marketing the GX80 as 5-axis IBIS with the possibility of 2 more in the lens. The A7II "looks" like 3-axis IBIS plus 2-axis in-lens and is noted by reviewers as being not as good as the Panasonic or Olympus options. The GX8's IBIS is said to be 4-axis and isn't as good as the GX80. I'm still confident that it's 5-axis IBIS, regardless of E-stabalization ON or OFF. I would approach the question "Does E-stabalization degrade the image?" the same way as I approach grading. Personally, I would rather have a choice later on... I doubt that Panasonic is doing better stabalization in software than the editors out there. Add to that the idea of a extra crop and I think the upside is only marginal... could be wrong though...

I didn't mean to sound upset... sorry if I did. However, I can't image how any sort of "electronic" stabalization could ever correct for pitch and yaw... up/down (yes), left/right(yes), roll (maybe, but hard), pitch(?), yaw(?).

I am quite happy with the IBIS... I reckon it's one of the best on the market. I've read the chart I don't know how many times... it's clear in saying IBIS in all modes is available. Do a search for "3-axis" in the manual. This camera moves that sensor along 5 different axis as the graphic above exemplifies. E-stabalization only works in video mode, taking a further crop and doing more movement of the image in software, just like many camcorders out there would. I think it would be better to stabalize in post rather than use E-stabalization.

I've shot over 5 hours in varied environments and subjects... have yet to see moiré in 4k. I suggest you shoot 4k and downsample to 1080- processor intensive, but worth it. You should also note that moiré should appear on some subjects like a wicker basket- it's natural for our eyes to see too. Nope. Go back further in this thread and you'll see. Panasonic has made it crazy confusing for us, but 4k 5-axis IBIS with ALL lenses is its minimum capability.

No, I don't because I don't want the hybrid (and extra crop). I only get 5-axis IBIS with my manual focus lens.

I'm sure I'm getting a stabalized image... I would recognize my coffee shakies anywhere. Panasonic screwed the pooch on their charts- they just wanted everyone to remember that dual-IS was only possible with a Panasonic stabalized lens... which is true. "Body" does indeed mean 5-axis IBIS, regardless of the lens slapped on it. Put a Panasonic stabalized lens and you get dual-IS (5 IBIS + 2). Electronic crops- never really shot much with it because of that. "Hybrid" means a combination of 5-axis IBIS and electronic IS. "When [E-stabalization] is set to ON" is written on their chart to show that "Hybrid" (5-axis IBIS + electronic IS) is ONLY available in video mode, not photo mode. That comma just after "Body" in the bottom right-hand box is essential in understanding the chart. 5-axis "Body" stabalization is available in ALL 6 boxes on the chart. Try this: 1) put on a 50mm lens 2) turn off the stabalizer (no E-stabalization) 3) punch in focus and pull focus (note the shakies) 4) now, turn on the stabalizer (no E-stabalization), your shakies are now gone when you punch in.

There's been confusion about this since way back in this thread, even when it came out. The stabalizer mechanism in this camera is 5-axis-only IBIS with the option of turning off an axis for panning (never really tried it though). Just set the stabalizer Operation Mode to the "hand with four shaky marks" and set your focal length- work great, even in 4k.

Incorrect. I'm using a 50mm Pentax F1.7 WITH 5 axis IBIS.

I don't think so. The better stabalization comes from dual-IS, a combo of 5-axis IBIS and 2 axis in-lens sabalization. The runner-up is just 5-axis IBIS and no in-lens stabalization. IMO the electronic type doesn't figure in all of this; hence a distant third due to the crop.

This is a quick reminder of how effective the GX80's IBIS really is. Remarkable!

Yes. I don't think there are any sort of standards. Sony's 0 saturation doesn't equal Panasonic's 0 saturation. In fact, it would be interesting to have some sort of standard or simple chart. Does that exist?

Although I haven't done this myself, I believe @Andrew Reid mentioned it in his preliminary review of the GX80. This is what he said: "But there’s more… the camera’s new processor can record 4K to the SD card internally at 100Mbit/s AS WELL AS outputting the full 4K 422 feed to an external recorder for high bitrate ProRes at the same time. " So yes it does. It looks as though you're getting some really good colors with Davinci indeed... the greens are fantastic! Unfortunately, I don't have enough experience (or time) with it to say what a GX80 signal would produce... my impression is that you're 16 and 960 refer to a luma range... I thought it would appear at 0-255 on the GX80, but I'm not sure. I've seen this myself, but why would 8-bit Log files exist? All them have saturation and contrast increases after applying a LUT... videographers use them all the time for serious projects. Is it "o.k." with 8-bit Log, but not with non-log? I still find there's quite a bit of color in a sat = -5 GX80 file, sometimes I'd say it looks closer to what I saw.

Hallo @PannySVHS (German?), Truth be told... I'm not an expert filmmaker or colorist. I'm just an English teacher who really likes filmmaking. When I purchased the GX80, I was very attracted to its feature set and form-factor. Now, I'm trying to find the best way to get the most our of it, either as a gradable image or straight from camera. The way I have been trying for a gradable image (with filmconvert because it's easy) was to look into the red, blue, and green channels separately to evaluate them. My informal evaluation showed this: the GX80 has a tendency for a noisy blue channel and a red channel with almost a "halo" effect to it. I know this because I downloaded camera files from expensive cameras to compare. So for the WB A3G3 (which was a recommendation from @Inazuma) I could see that the blue channel got increased just a tad, keeping it further away from the bottom 5% IRE values in FCPX; hence, it had less clipping. IMO, the closer you get to the bottom or top 5% IRE, the more chances of clipping. I also liked the greens I could get after grading. This is interesting, Kamil. I think I've seen the "plastic" look you're talking about, but not so much on the GX80 (or Panasonic) files. I've been told this before: don't reduce the saturation too much on a 8bit file... but why? I thought it was more about banding. Can you explain more? Also, some say with 8bit: "get as close to the final image you want in-camera." So, what are people shooting S-log, V-log, C-log? They've all got 8-bit versions, supposedly "ready" for grading, all of which look really flat and unusable out of camera. Personally, I'm just trying to get the best, consistent, gradable image from the GX80 using it as the only "tool" I have? Since, Mr. Reid isn't publishing a more detailed review on its IQ, matters must be taken into my own hands. Any other suggestions?

Concerning white balance and other settings, I've been using Sunny (A3G3) and Tungsten(A3G3), depending on the project. I'm of the school of thought to maintain consistency and just stick with it, letting colors fall where they may. @Inazuma came up with A3G3. The reason for my using it was due to the blue channel dipping into the 0%-5%. Panasonic's implementation of the 8-bit codec is excellent, but there just isn't much information in that range because it (correctly) put most of the information in the 5%-95% range. The same thing happens at the 95%-100%. @jase is using a Tiffen filter to lower the contrast even further... resulting in a nice effect too. Finally, I think it's almost a toss-up between Standard or Natural, as long as everything is set at -5, the channels will be clean. I gave Natural a slight edge though.

Good to hear it doesn't feel big. It probably helps with IS too. From the video I posted earlier, it looks like you have a sweet setup. Good luck with all the editing, hopefully not as tiring as in the photo!

Given their weight and size, I think you're right in waiting for the GH5. It seems like a better fit. The GX80 is, IMO, just a smaller option instead of the GH5... for those don't want/need to deal with logs or size. From what I hear, it's going to have at least all of the features of the GX80 with a super-fast processor in a bigger body... probably right up your alley.

I know there are some fans of the Voigtlander lenses on this thread. Here are some comparisons between them and Olympus's offerings.

Some of those shots practically look like they're on a tripod, a testament to this as a low-light setup. Looks nice.

I'm steering away from Adobe products ever since CC became their thing. I just prefer the pay-for-it-once model. Also, their site got hacked and I doubt it ever going to be secure. For that, they'd have to pay for and manage security experts, not to mention secure their other software (flash, etc.). I like using FCPX, but I've recently decided that I won't be letting it manage my catalogue of videos. I tried this, but it just became too cumbersome. Now, I'm using it to just work on the videos for one specific project. The finder makes more sense to me, especially when backing up. Its ability to sync audio, use Filmconvert, and make my edits are the primary reasons for using it. I'm still looking for free solutions when I make my imminent switch to Linux.

I've heard this before... Maybe the 12-32 would be a better match. Bonus- it's super cheap second hand, rather small, and allows me to try out DUAL IS. The big point for me is that I'd like to have something a little wider and smaller in my kit. The 25mm is a fantastic lens and I've been really happy, especially considering what I paid for it new. My telephoto is a Pentax M 50mm F1.7 (bought it for $30), also a very nice lens with a great feature of being almost a macro lens when you put a reversal ring on it.

I believe it's Sigma's 30mm F1.4. Yeah, not sure why the want the US market to stick only to the 12-32. I would also like to have this lens, but I was going for low-light, indoor stuff too. I imagine when sales start slowing a little, they'll have a body-only option and then you can pick up the 25mm like I did. My next lens will probably be the Panasonic-Leica 15mm or the 12-32 although the 20mm f1.7 could potentially replace my 25mm and still give me a wide enough shot... choices- something the Sony folk don't quite have.

I took a look at his shots and he's using the same setup as I am for this shot GX80 + Panasonic 25mm F1.7. It's the sharpest combo I've ever used, out resolving my old RX100 (20MP). I got this package for under 700 Euros- IMO, deal of the year. If one's looking into this form-factor, for the money, it can't be beat in terms of photo quality + video quality.