Dimitris Stasinos

2 hours ago, Luke Mason said:

Canon is developing 24-70 f/2.8 IS

It makes a lot of sense for use on canon bodies, but would it make a difference over the ii version on a camera like gh5 with IBIS?

My query is "How can area autofocus fail when tap to focus just works in the exact same area?" In both cases there is a specific area where the camera has to focus, whats the difference in defining the exact same part of the image with a square box or by your finger?

12 minutes ago, tonysss said:

 

GH5 saves slow-motion shots to 1080/50p, and my project is 1080/25p, so 50p slow motion shots slow down to 50% and no twixtor is needed

Can't GH5 conform at 25fps from 180fps HFR ? What's the gain of conforming to 50 fps in camera and then stretching in a 25 fps timeline? The final footage is still shot at 180 fps, you can't produce 360 fps clips from 180 fps footage without generating frames. Correct me if i am wrong.

1 hour ago, tonysss said:

GH5 360fps :-) 

The project is 25p and the shots GH5 are 180fps/50p  slowed to 50%

 

I don't get this...If you recorded this at 180 fps, how can the final clip end up being 14,4 times slower (360 fps) than realtime without using generated frames from twixtor or something? Am i missing something?

20 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

I think now with the Atomos having a new recorder to do 4K 60fps and even their oldest 4K recorder the Shogun being able to do FS raw, it makes the FS700 still quite attractive even another year later in 2017!

I am having mixed feelings from my first tests. IQ is stunning but i am having lots of those kangaroo skippy warnings on screen and the device splits my recording every time this happens. I am using a brand new Sandisk Extreme Pro 512 GB SSD (recommended) and a proper 3G-SDI cable, so i have no idea why this happens. It's a pain, and the extra step in Resolve...hmmm...maybe i will give this a pass.

3 hours ago, jonpais said:

 It's a bitch trying to find RAM in a third world country!

You can find them on eBay easily. You have a late 2013 iMac 27" so any ram with those specs: 

PC3-12800

Unbuffered

Nonparity

204-pin

1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM

Will do the job.

Crucial, Corsair, CSX, doesn't really matter...

6 hours ago, Trek of Joy said:

Never thought of that, do you just delete the other libraries? 

No just right click & close them. 

Actually the reason i upgraded my ram to 32 Gb was the lengthy projects i work on (usually tv shows). If you are working on 5 min projects or Vlogs (and you have bkgr render off) you won't see any difference. Every time you are tweaking a single clip in any way, a low quality preview clip is loaded into ram to smooth out playback (background render does the same but using ProRes HQ or any other intermediate codec, so your memory gets full faster). When you are out off ram, for example on a lengthy project, FCPX is throwing these data on you hard disk and is streaming from there, so you are experiencing lags on your playback. It's easy to know when you need a ram upgrade and thats when you see your mac's performance slowing down as you are progressing with your project. 

& Also: Never leave Libraries loaded on your FCPX's browser. It's important to have a single Library (the one which you are working on) opened ONLY. These are data that are also loaded into your ram and slow down your machine for no reason.

5 hours ago, jonpais said:

I've got a 2013 27" iMac, 16GB RAM. When editing my last video, a five-minute clip (ProRes) with two LUTs and NEAT video, the RAM was completely exhausted and there was over 32GB swap. Will creating proxy media and turning off background rendering help, or should I just bite the bullet and buy 32GB of memory today?

Turning background rendering off always helps, since FCPX loves throwing everything into ram. Leave everything un-rendered until you export your project. This won't affect your final render times dramatically from my experience. Proxy media are handy for 4K editing & multicams, but you need to switch to optimised or original media to color correct so it's inevitable to work on line before exporting to see what you are doing. NEAT is wonderful but kinda processor and ram hungry as it's output goes also directly into ram, so again switching off bkgr render helps. Also switch playback to "better performance". When you have no effects applied and you are working with ProRes, as you do, FCPX effectively streams data directly from your scratch disk, so an external ssd is a must for your libraries. According to your mac's specs you can choose through your workflow which part of your machine will carry the heaviest tasks, so if you have a weak processor for example, transcode H264 to optimised media, throw tour library on an external disk and turn off background rendering. Try these and if you have problems then upgrade your Ram to 32 gigs.

Thanks for the test Aaron! Regarding gh5 (and previous gh*) motion issues, have you guys encountered the source of this problem? Is it NR as Don Kotos stated? Maybe a codec related issue? Is it possible that with the 400 mbps All-I will this get solved? 

9 minutes ago, Cinegain said:

Ok, will do.

But seriously, what am I supposed to do, buy an additional $2500+ laptop just for editing (not going to give up ma Windows machine)? I mean, it probably keeps me from being distracted, but nobody likes throwing away money (I almost said for no good reason, but ok, it's a pretty good reason if it works that well) or working two different systems.

I worked as a full time editor for 2 years on a late 2012 27" i5 iMac, 6-8 hours everyday, dealing with 5 angle FHD multicams and FCPX worked like a breeze. You don't need a monster mac or macbook to work with it, even in 4K. Just buy a used iMac or MBP, throw 16-32 GB of Ram inside, turn background rendering off, use a cheap external usb3 ssd for your libraries, turn on Proxy if needed and enjoy your peace of mind for the rest of your life as an editor. Then, when you get paid from your first job, buy a mac mini as a backup system, in case that something goes wrong with your main system.  Really...it's that simple, this setup will pay you back for sure.

13 hours ago, tweak said:

 I just don't think the 10bit part is going to give most what they expect (something like bmpcc or whatever).
 

Exactly. Many expected to see fairytales and elves on OOC 10 bit footage, but the real benefits will come after summer 400 mbps update & will be noticeable only in post. BTW i saw a comparison with A7S ii (since this is a Sony vs Pana thread) where you can already see a benefit, even with 150 mbps on a sky gradient. I am still waiting for a proper comparison between A7S ii & GH5. I consider these 2 as the only viable and future proof options in this specific form factor for independent cinematographers right now.

Edit. Plus XT-2...(sorry Fuji...)

I am trying desperately to like gh5. It's specs fits my needs, in some cases they exceed them. I am scanning YT for days, seeings clips from early owners, i graded some downloadable files my self and i think it is time to stop. I have seen great little movies and single shots from cameras like NX1, A6300-500, even RX10 & RX100 but every time i am watching a GH5 clip these days, (i will say it, don't start throwing rocks at me...) ALL i am seeing is crashed blacks, stuttery motion, & ugly sharp edges on dogs, girlfriends & trees. I kinda liked Luke's footage so let's say that this is a little gem that many hobbyists can afford but a few of them can make art with it (and these guys will buy it next month), so you know nothing until you get your hands on it. But this is weird...It was only a month after RX10 ii's release when i saw some clips on YT that blew my mind, and that was a camera aimed at less experienced users. I won't say that in my hands this camera will sing, but cmon....i am the only one that doesn't see anything cinematic in this YT early GH5 garbage cluster? 

6 hours ago, Don Kotlos said:

Nothing an external GPU can't solve  :

 

Have you tested any? Is there a specific device that you recommend?

Just tried the beta version. All the goodies are here, except from a proper multicam interpretation. Auto audio sync doesn't work properly, playback is laggy as hell with 3 FHD angles on a 5k iMac late 2015 even with optimised media, and very basic functions are still missing. 10 times faster than before? No...no way. I would say it's 10 times slower than FCPX. But on the other hand i don't have an Nvidia card so i am loosing CUDA's benefits.

Overall, really nice platform, can't believe its free. Unparalleled CC funcionality as always, BUT for broadcast applications where speed counts, it still lags behind. I can't even imagine how i could migrate from FCPX to this for multicam editing.

39 minutes ago, wonderboy said:

Using these settings the GH5 should become a AF Monster! So no more AF controversy?

 

AF seems to work fine here, but the shots look stuttery (is this a word?) on my monitor, very distracting...I don't see any words about shutter speed on his description, so i can only guess that this was shot on high shutter speed to minimise DOF and test AF?

30 minutes ago, manueldomes said:

I will venture into proxy editing territory with the GH5 as well, from the looks of it...

Related question, though more concerning FCPX than the GH5 -- is there any advantage to creating optimized media when you will be editing proxy media anyway?

I am using proxies when I have massive projects with multicam clips. If you have plenty of room on your HD create both, do a rough cut using proxies and then switch to optimized for CC and final touches.

1 hour ago, Vesku said:

Yes in photos but in VIDEO:

24P - 24 AF samples/second

30P - 30 AF samples/second

60P - 60 AF samples/second

Contrast analysis has nothing to do with fps. It is a separated task and in many cameras there is a dedicated chip for this. This is like bonding fps with EVF's refresh rate. Different things.

Have you seen this?

19 minutes ago, Clayton Moore said:

I never thought of it that way, I would say that they do tend to favor SONY quite a bit from what Ive seen.  

The difference on this screenshot is dramatic. Thanks! (btw i quoted Clayton with no reason at all, lol, sorry)

13 minutes ago, Jimmy said:

So how is their point wrong? It just means all the cameras in this price range also have the same con.

They have had their hands on the camera and have given an opinion, just like every other blogger out there. For those that are convinced the GH5 is great and worth the money (me!), then there is no need to worry. If you are on the fence, then it is another point of view to digest and make conclusions from.

At least we can put to bed the idea that all these other sites just pander to the whims of the manufacturer.

When you are naming as a reviewer some negative things (cons) about a camera, you are referring to things that should be there, considering the company's marketing, the product's price and the competition in this specific price range. HFR is softer than regular 1080p in all cameras since faster sensor readouts come with compromises, at least for now...But 180p imagery, slightly softer than Pana's tack sharp 1080p is not a "con", this is what I am saying. It is called "gift".

If you set the 10 bit artifacts in Vlog aside and look at their cons list, this review seems quite subjective. "Dynamic range is limited". 10-11 stops is "fine" for such a camera, it's slightly worse than xt-2. "Lowlight is average". No it's not...This is an m43 camera that gives you a usable 3200 iso sensitivity, which is not average, it's "fine". "1080p 180fps gives you less resolution than actual 1080p". Really? Name a camera at this price range (or double the money if you want) that does better than this. Luke's HFR footage was terrific.. "Some canon lenses did not work with speed booster..." Cmon...what has this to do with the camera? In which universe these are cons?

I don't get it... What has white balance to do with macroblocking? All I am seeing in those extreme gradings above is color banding, which is normal after such a push in post. Macroblocking is a compression artifact...

30 minutes ago, Axel said:

Now there is a confirmation that the SB "XL" can't be used with the GH5 and SIG 18-35 (1,3 x crop). Maybe it would work with Ultra though. But frankly, I think I will look into full frame lenses then. There are a few nice MFT's, but they are either too slow or offer too little "bang for the buck" (a little shy to use those phrases - unsure if they are appropriate) ...

@Flynn 

Thanks for the podcast link!

I have a Canon 24-70 2.8 L ii (resting on a shelf alone & scared since my 5d was stolen...) and thinking to use it with gh5 with SB Ultra. But does it worth paying the extra cost for the SB? Will AF work? At least single point AF? I bet this will make a nice (but heavy) combo...

Kinda outdated info according to this thread's flow, but i downloaded Luke's 180 fps original clips yesterday and tried a quick CC. I was ready to begin a CC marathon (i am used to sony's slog), only to realise that with a few clicks (i stretched it, boosted the saturation & added a green tint) the footage looked great to my eyes...wtf. I was expecting a ton of banding & artifacts (noisy shadows at least) but this stuff is not only usable, but pretty convincing for a low budget cinema tool. I would't shoot vlog HFR but on the other hand i am not seeing stiff, unmanageable files here. Am i the only one which was surprised? What's the bitrate on 180 fps FHD anyway?