John Matthews

On the G100, I tried a number of things to eliminate moiré, including a mist filter. Maybe it wasn't the right strength, but nothing worked other than moving back a foot or so. Of course the framing was wrong after that. I even tried a different lens altogether and kept the same frame- it was the same result, moiré on a cotton shirt. Panasonic does a decent job at detecting moiré and removing the color from it but the pattern remains. With DFD, it was always puling and that also mitigated the problem- moiré would go off and on. I watched a video just this morning filmed on a X-T5 and there was moiré of the worst kind with plenty of colors roaming around. It was definitely the shirt though. Clothing is one thing you can control sometimes, but not buildings. On a wedding shoot like yours, it's impossible though.

Good to know!

So, how did you deal with that? That seems like a nightmare!

So what I was saying earlier about a correlation between pixel density and moiré is true. The less space there is between pixels, the less chance of moiré. In this case, 12k capture is better than 4k when it comes to moiré. On the G100, it really sucked for 1080p moiré at precisely the distance one would vlog at. Go back 50 cm and moiré would be gone due to the frequency of the patterns. I imagine the GX80/85 has a similar problem in 1080p.

Yes. If only the Foveon sensor took off, moiré would be out of everything. We should start a new thread on moiré only. I bet if we pool our resources, we might be able to diminish the effect in post or planning. If you look on YouTube, there isn't really that much on the subject; maybe that's why there isn't more energy put into it.

Yes. the GH6 is cheap now. It's an amazing deal. I just sold mine and I didn't lose too much, but I bought it at a deep discount on Black Friday. My feeling is that Panasonic isn't going to do the same deals for Black Friday this year. Anyway, I lost a couple hundred, not bad for owning it for a year. I also made it up in other gear I purchased and sold it at a profit. It sounds crazy to pay so much for AF, but fortunately, it's not just that as there are many other features too. For me, I just want something significantly better than my E-M1 ii and I think the G9 ii hits the mark, especially on the video side; with photos, only a little.

I learned a couple of things after watching a Lumix live stream. DFD is still used for S-AF because it's faster than PDAF. I've also heard that when working in low-light and small apertures (f11), only contrast is used due to PDAF not being efficient- this is true amongst all brands.

Yeah, I've seen moiré on that too. In fact, I don't know too many cameras that, with 100% certainty, don't have moiré. I'll bet even an ALEXA might have some frequency where it happens. Awhile back, I purchased some Ikea "lace" curtains and I notice a moiré effect with my naked eye, something that I thought was only possible on digital sensors, but I guess not. Oddly enough, none of my digital sensors would pick up the moiré patterns that I could see. It's 2023 and we've AI upresing and all other sorts of quality improvements, but no software AI has figured out moiré.

Yes, to buy or not. For Apple devices, I'd always go to the MacRumors.com buyer's guide. They'd say "buy now, caution, or don't buy". Given the G9ii is about to be released, I'm sure the "Buy now" would be warranted. However, do I NEED it? No. I just sold a whole bunch of gear that I wasn't using enough, I now I have the funds to pull the trigger on something I WANT. Sure, it would suck to see a GH7 coming out with a variable ND (in ALL MODES) and PDAF in a smaller body for much cheaper, but I don't think it'll happen. There's also the notion of camera paralysis, not know which one to take because they're all great- I had this. Camera upgrade paralysis is another thing- thinking there's something better soon. In terms of "bigger hybrid camera" for M43, I have my doubts about anything coming soon other than a GH7; even then, it won't be until January to March IMO. I trust Panasonic to not screw their customers too much by obsoleting just after release. Given it took 5 years to have a meaningful release of a G9ii, I think it'll be fine. On another note, I did see a video by Geeky Nerdy Techy. He said there was moiré in one of his videos: Again, most cameras will have frequency where it hits. I'm not exactly sure if it's better than or worse than the GH6 in that regard, but it would be interesting to know.

I've also seen moiré on many other cameras. I think it's just a frequency thing. I've noticed, for example, many YouTubers are turning to wearing linen instead of cotton; so, I imagine it's a problem on many cameras. I do believe, perhaps falsely, that pixel density has a major role- the more, the better; I think M43 on the GH6 or G9 ii definitely has that going for it. The other problem for me with moiré is that I just can't seem to get rid of it. I wish there was a plugin or AI that could meaningfully make it go away, as Topaz has done with aliasing. Until then, pixel density and anti-aliasing filters are all we've got IMO.

That was an interesting comparison but also rather limited being at some show. The conclusion for him was to say the FX30 was the best because, even though it lacks good IBIS, the "photos are amazing" and costs a little less. I'm finding that rather curious because FX30 lacks an actual shutter, meaning it can't even do flash photography, a basic feature for almost any "photo" camera... maybe it can, but I couldn't find any info on it. Also, he talks about M43 not doing well in low-light, which is not accurate due to their amazing IBIS (maybe he meant "high ISO"?). That was a very confusing review for me. As far as "detail rendering", I never had any problem with the GH6; nor did I notice anything. Maybe if you A-B with another camera, it's different. If anything, I'd say the trouble with GH6 is the implementation of DR Boost. The rolling shutter on the GH6 was definitely NOT an issue either, especially with IBIS enabled.

Yeah, I've said for such a long time I would not go FF again. As I said, back issues will keep me from it. I've already got all the lenses; staying with M43 makes more sense. Also, slow motion is more important for me than the high ISO capabilities in video (as I can add lights) and 1/3 of a stop I'd gain in DOF (Olympus 17mm f/1.2 on M43 vs Panasonic 35mm f/1.8 on FF). The G9ii will drop in price too, but I might just pull the trigger. The only thing that's going to stop me is a GH7 with variable ND (IN ALL MODES, including slow motion); in which case, I sell the G9 ii and get the GH7. I wish Panasonic would tease us more with specs. I failed to mention the slow-mo capabilities matter to me. The GH6 has been soooo good with that.

*telephoto

Yes, I understand. Waiting would also make some sense. The G9 ii would be even better for me if it were just a little smaller, but, then again, I have a smaller camera too with smaller lenses. I think Panasonic has done away with all the really small (GX850, GM1, which keep gaining price on the used market) and they've gone with smallish like the GX85 and GX9. Something tells me they might come out with a rangefinder camera soon and it will have PDAF and decent video features, but that size camera won't work for my bigger lenses either whereas the G9 ii or GH7 would. The S5 ii would be super for interior stuff, but I don't want to sink 1000 euros on a telephone with AF. Also, I'd never use it because it's too big. The one thing that bugs me about the S5 ii is possible moiré. I've never seen it on the GH6 and I bet the G9 ii will be the same. The GH6 has been a little too quirky for me in that DR Boost needed to be set on or off. I don't like that.

That's helpful because I have a 17mm f/1.2, 9mm f/1.7, 75mm f/1.8, and the 40-150mm f/2.8. High ISO isn't that much of a problem for me as I've already got the DXO for photos and with the 9mm and 17mm, I can get decent stuff. The problem would be going forward if I were to choose a S5ii as telephoto is expensive and heavy. The X-factor is of course my bad back. Panasonic's pricing of the G9 ii is just a little high or the S5 ii is a little low IMO. It's dang hard to choose.

*2199, tax included

Here's the rub as of today in France: Option 1: G9 ii body for 1899 Euros (I have the lenses) Option 2: S5 ii body + 20-60 + 50mm prime for only 2099 euros What would you do?

PDAF will no longer be enough for a GH7. I'm guessing they're going to find a body form-factor for a S1H ii and GH7 that works. The eND will be on both.

The G9 ii seems like a really interesting camera and I'm considering to pick one up. It makes me think the GH7 is most likely going to have some sort of electronic ND filter (what else can they put in it?), which could be amazing. Purely speculation, you get 13 stops DR with V-Log, great IBIS, PDAF with great features, all the exposure tools with an electronic ND- that could be special. On a side note, I decided to get rid of my GH6, G100, and one of my GH2s. Also, I decided to only keep my best glass (for IQ) or smallest glass. I just wasn't using the other stuff. I'll let someone else have fun with it. Here's my inventory now: An old, beaten up, hacked GH2 for live streaming (I make money with that). For daily usage, a hacked E-M1 ii. For nice lenses, Olympus 12-40 Pro, Olympus 40-150 Pro, Olympus 17 f/1.2 Pro, Olympus 75mm f/1.8 and Panasonic 9mm. For small lenses, Olympus 14-42 EZ, Panasonic 14mm f/2.5, Olympus 17mm f/1.8 (two of them), Olympus 45mm f/1.8. When it came to getting rid of stuff, I'm happy that it might help with my "indecision" when asking myself which lens and camera to pick up. I still have too much though. Anyone else have this problem? I love having options, but sometimes it's overwhelming because I like all of them; they all have something good about them.

If you take the example of the 20mm on Olympus, it's a train wreck in video with PDAF and C-AF (at least with Face detect). The motors will make grinding noises in all the audio (if you need it). However, it works great in S-AF as it should. The Olympus 17mm (1.8, not 2.8)or 20mm would be better options.

Is the Ninja V compatible with 5.8K ProRes RAW? I thought you needed the V+ for that.

I have 2 GH2s. I usually only use them for live streaming, but the other day, I decided to swap it out with the GH6. I "only" do 1080p streaming and the image was about 10% more detailed than the GH2, but by the time it actually reaches the other person, I doubt anyone would notice. I also love the ergos on the GH2. I've come accustomed to operating it backwards. I will say it does weird things when you hit the display button in the HDMI. The internal mics are decent, but I think it's mainly because of no IBIS. The GX85, by comparison, is unusable. This is actually why I use the G100 for a lot of stuff because there isn't any weirdness in the audio. This cannot be entirely the case though. My GX850 has some of the worst audio I've ever heard, even with C-AF off. Manufacturers fine-tune their mics to NOT pick up some sounds (IBIS, AF motors, etc.). My feeling is that the GX85 and GX850 didn't have the R&D budget for that.

Good to hear that there are still people willing to go very in-depth in such nerdy topics. Yesterday, I tried asking ChatGPT about the notion of equivalencies, a hot topic on forums. It failed miserably. I asked for a MFT equivalent of shooting my grandmother's 1936 Rolliecord. I know the "rough" answer, but ChatGPT kept making mathematical mistakes. I have to say I'm super impressed with it though. As an English teacher, it's a tremendous tool. For filmmakers, it's great too. My point with my post was to say that Forums could get eaten up by such services if the forum is mainly used for "help in learning". AI seems to be better, faster, and have fewer barriers to getting decent responses. Also, I've only been using the free version. The paid version is better, I'm sure.

Something that I've noticed is that Chat GPT seems to give efficient and relevant answers to almost any subject, including cameras. It's straight to the point, no BS, no political stuff, no opinions, etc. Only, sometimes, it's flat-out wrong. Here are some of my questions that I've asked, only because I was curious: Does 4k 8 bit have more or less information as 1080p 10 bit? What about 4k 4:2:0 vs 2k 4:2:0 10 bit? What about 4k 4:2:2 8 bit vs 2k 4:2:0 10 bit? How about 2k 4:2:2 vs 2k 4:2:0 10 bit? Does 2k 4:2:2 8 bit have more information than 4k 4:2:0 8 bit? Is 4k or 4k downresed to 2k better for avoiding moiré patterns? What post-processing techniques specifically designed to address moiré are there? Can you explain clone stamping techniques and can you do it with a basic video editor? Will shooting in v-log help with moiré? Can shooting at higher frame rates help with moiré? In terms of detail, can humans see the difference between 2k and 4k at normal viewing distances? In terms of percentage of resolution increase, what's the difference between 2k and SD? Is there the same perceptible clarity between 2k and 4k? What are the benefits of recording in 24fps rather than 23.978fps? How are digital cinema files prepared (file format, bit-rate, frame rates) for cinema theaters? I feel a little "embarrassed" to ask some of these questions simply because I don't want to have others take time to answer them. Also, AI just gives me what I want, nothing more. No need for sifting through info or moderation. Forums used to be a place for some of these questions, now ChatGPT does the job.

I actually prefer the predictable look of just leaving it at one temperature. Maybe it's old-school, but AWB makes me grade differently for each shot whereas setting the kelvin, as long as it isn't that extreme, helps with the overall feel. Shoot a night shot inside and we can tell it's night because of the yellow lighting, morning and evening outside are blue; it just makes sense. Do this AWB and you have to make things feel blue, yellow, etc. in post. I've done tests regarding contrast settings in particular. My findings were clear: Panasonic cameras DON'T have more latitude or any benefit from reducing contrast from the default; if anything, it just might screw up. It would seem that so many have said this (including myself, probably), but when looking at the results, this "wisdom" doesn't hold up from what I see. I've heard people say "the compression doesn't have to work as hard", but I haven't seen anything that obvious to come to the conclusion of -5 contrast and saturation. That was a very interesting test and it probably confirms what I said above as the ones where the contrast and saturation was low. I'm almost willing to throw up my arms and say: "the Panasonic engineers probably know better than me"- just leave contrast and saturation at its default if you like the way it looks. Sometimes, we just overthink it.