John Matthews

I've decided to coin a new word: jackitis [mass noun] filmmaker condition in which a camera cannot be used due to the absence of a microphone jack.

Thanks for this. It needed to be done. I'm not sure for the color-shift upon uploading. However, you might want to try the Standard Profile instead. I've had good luck with that... but in the end, it's just a matter of personal preference. I'm finding your GX85 sample too pink in the skintone, but then again, I don't have a perfectly calibrated monitor and, as you mentioned, Youtube might be doing something to your file. Personally, I've just decided to use Standard (-3,-5,-5,-3), with shadows at +2... It seems good to me. I think the most important is to turn off all sharpening and noise reduction- you can tweek the rest in post. Also, I just leave it at something that suits the project to keep the look consistent. Finally, I've been choosing only from sunny and incandescent WB and just letting the colors do what they want- again, consistency being the goal.

On another photography-related note, the GX80 says in its specs that it has a max flash sync speed of 1/160, but I and others have found 1/250; so, that's good news!

Couldn't help noticing that when I import converted DNG files and apply VSCO Kodak Porta 160 NC - (one of my favorite looks), it hardly changes the original RAW file's skin colors... just increasing the highlights, but the overall saturation and skin color seems very similar. Other cameras that I've used over the years had a much bigger change when I applied the same Preset. Interesting.

I really don't understand why people even care about having a mic jack and headphone jack. Knowing you have poor audio REQUIRES you to pay attention to it, get the mic closer to the subject and just sync it. I'm OK for having the jacks, but rarely do manufactures include good preamps... yeah the GH4 and G7 have the mic jack, but it won't beat a zoom H1 ($100), correctly positioned, and perhaps hooked up to an even better mic. What's the big deal?

Are Panasonic lenses and Olympus lenses corrected in-camera, even the RW2 files? No need to correct with Lightroom? I know that's what happened with my Sony Rx100, but I didn't know that's what happened with Panasonic and Olympus cameras.

Good question. Did they have them before? I've been using Lightroom 5, not CC... simply because I don't trust Adobe with any of my personal information. In Lightroom 5, I've never had that option even with the GX7 I used. To use this software, I simply converted the rw2 files into DNG's so that LR would read them properly. This might need more investigation.

Adobe Camera RAW update... GX80/85 is now supported. I started looking at it and I'm impressed so far. Go here: mac: http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=6067&sdid=952G4XMS&skim19445X767302Xf77773524ac4c51fd9957afb28a66c8e windows: http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=6068&sdid=952G4XMS&skim19445X767302X5f9888bb3155db5bc04227b1a3892c8c

So, I'm watching some of the prices of the limitedly available GX80 and I've come to the conclusion that I think Panasonic has made a poor business decision. I'm almost certain they could have sold it for at least 100 Euros more...and it would still sell like hotcakes.

Do we still not have any news about the HDMI output on the GX80? Many people are interested! I just asked Jordan at the CameraStoreTV...

I'm sure he's still interested in posting something about its video quality. There are over 50000 views on the forum pages concerning the gx80. The interest is certainly there.

From what I've learned about white balance in video, AWB is the worst setting because the camera will change it on the fly. I've been told that many directors simply choose "sunny" or "tungsten" depending on the circumstances- that's it. IMO that's the best way to go as these cameras were calibrated this way and it will give consistency across your work as well as making it a super-fast setting to dial in. If you don't like the colors, just adjust them in post. The GX80 offers plenty of room in the 4k files to do this.

Thanks for sharing that and doing the tests. I'm wondering what conclusions one could make from this about the colors on the GX80? Is it more about ridding the camera of pinkish skin tones (I've seen them in LX100 footage, but not in this vid)... or is more about perfecting and getting it closer to reality? Since you were there, which one was closest to reality?

I looked at Canon too before buying the GX80, but quickly found that clearly innovation and progressing their lower-end DSLR's weren't their thing. They've somehow been able to market virtually the same camera ever since the 50D- absolutely brilliant for making massive amounts of money! That's not saying they can't make nice images, because they can... but you hit the nail on the head with the word "soft." They decided that details in video should only be for their higher-end cameras. I look at the GX80 and it screams "2016," newer Canons in this price range scream "2010."

I noticed very high shutter speeds (fountain scene- water was too crisp for 1/50 or 1/60)... I think that would make it look unnatural. Globally, it was some nice footage. On the GX80, people have remarked about some stuttering during a pan, but I haven't seen it that much in my own footage. Neither did I see the correlation between focus modes and jitter. I saw it more with the mixing of IBIS/DUAL IS and Digital stabilization.

You can shoot bad footage on the best camera in the world. Conversely, you can shoot great footage on a "bad" camera. The GX80 shoots stabilized, 4k footage in a very small form-factor... I'm liking mine. As for "filmic," it's subjective. If you like the look of a camera, use that!

I just sent an email to Panasonic France to confirm HDMI output. They need to be clear on this point. Sounds too good to be true if 10bit 4:4:4... or even 10bit 4:2:2. That would be huge for some people on this forum. Personally, I'm not sure to use it in that way, but just knowing I could is really cool.

So was all of that shot on a gx80? Care to share any information?

Oh o.k.... you didn't make that clear in your question. I guess if you shoot in P, A, S, or M mode, then NO. It doesn't show all the SS and aperture values in those modes when you press the video record button. I've never shot video like that, but if you do, I suppose it could be an issue DURING the recording. However, if you're content with a histogram and zebras DURING recording, it will be o.k. Also, you should note that you can adjust shutter and aperture values before recording, but I'm not totally sure if it keeps them. I don't think it does. Sony's have the same problem. AE lock does work. Most still and video cameras tend to isolate photo capabilities and video capabilities- specifically max ISO and lowest shutter speeds. When the camera is set to "still" mode, it thinks you want to take a photo, hence different parameters and they drop back into a P mode.

I can see shutter speed, aperture, iso, light meter, a live histogram and zebras BEFORE and DURING capturing video. That should be sufficient for monitoring your exposure. Not sure which LUMIX you're talking about, but this one is fully featured.

There's been quite a lot of people comparing the A6300 and the GX80. Here are my thoughts: I considered the A6300 back when it was introduced, but I concluded that it just had too many problems (they have been mentioned before in this thread). The killer for me was the price in mainland Europe... for some reason, Sony wanted us to pay a much higher price. I thought the G7 or even a 3-year old GX7 would have been a better value choice. I ended up getting a GX7, but the GX80 was announced; so, I sent the GX7 back and got the GX80. I'm quite happy with it now. I'm sure the A6300 is a competent camera for stills and video, but at that price with all of its problems? No thank you. One could also make an argument in favor of MFT for the lens choices too. Hope that help anyone looking to choose.

I'll go out on a limb here and say the GX80 doesn't "suck" at anything. AF is almost instantaneous in stills... needs work in video, but it beats a long list of other cameras in AF in video.

Sure. Bought mine here, but it's the "German" model of the GX80 in France... not sure what that was about. They seemed serious and sent it quickly. They have a shop only about 2 hours from where I live. That's why I went with them and they're the only ones in France to have it. Do what you like... not an endorsement. https://www.digit-photo.com/Appareils-photo-hybrides-numeriques-aFA0090/PANASONIC-Lumix-DMC-GX80-Boitier-Nu-Silver-rPANADMCGX80EFS.html

I did the same. Sold 2 DSLR's and an RX100 to buy the GX80 and a lens. Mainland Europe has the best deal right now at 599 Euros body only. I'm quite happy, but you should be aware that the GX80 initially feels a little small and fiddly compared to a DSLR IMO. I got over that quickly and it felt great after a few days. There's so much tech in this camera to satisfy many people. You won't regret it. Welcome to the forum!

Just thought that the camera movements in the video made me feel a little sick... a perceived "floating" this way and that way.. purely subjective and perhaps I shouldn't have made it. I wouldn't want my stupid comment to demotivate a struggling moviemaker who's trying to put him or herself out there. But perhaps this opens a larger discussion about IS? Now that the GX80 has it, at what point are people going to say "too much is too much?" Is it like the "clarity" slider in Lightroom? When it cam out, the internet started to be filled with images with super contrasty lines and they looked really strange and unnatural. I agree. The BMPCC wasn't a great allrounder though... just a superb, inexpensive device for filmmaking. The GX80 is really a great still camera too.