BTM_Pix

Yes.
There is definitely more to comes in terms of applying the processes to enhance the usability of all of the small Panasonic cameras that can be app controlled (which is where I originally came in with this!) than in unlocking additional rates and so on.
What I would like to spend a bit of additional time on though is trying to get it working on the LX100. I think there is something in there with that and it would be very useful on that camera. Ditto the travel cameras.
With regard to the bitrate stuff, I'll knock something up that will make it easy to do a matrix test as I think the behaviour changes when switching to the usually non-supported ones depending on which one you are currently set to. So there might be a combination that works.
Vlog? Mmm....I think I'm pretty confident that it won't work. I believe after looking at some logs I've received that I'm sending it the correct command but its no go.
Though as you say, hopefully everyone has the tools they need to poke around with this themselves now on different cameras so maybe someone can find the solution themselves.
 

Yes.
There is definitely more to comes in terms of applying the processes to enhance the usability of all of the small Panasonic cameras that can be app controlled (which is where I originally came in with this!) than in unlocking additional rates and so on.
What I would like to spend a bit of additional time on though is trying to get it working on the LX100. I think there is something in there with that and it would be very useful on that camera. Ditto the travel cameras.
With regard to the bitrate stuff, I'll knock something up that will make it easy to do a matrix test as I think the behaviour changes when switching to the usually non-supported ones depending on which one you are currently set to. So there might be a combination that works.
Vlog? Mmm....I think I'm pretty confident that it won't work. I believe after looking at some logs I've received that I'm sending it the correct command but its no go.
Though as you say, hopefully everyone has the tools they need to poke around with this themselves now on different cameras so maybe someone can find the solution themselves.
 

I have tried to get some higher rate video modes on the GX80 ("mp4ed") and although the camera does respond with the OK message that they are set it defaults to the standard 24p 4K as @BTM_Pix had said earlier.  If others want to try and dig around some more I have included my HTML file I have been using that has all the MP4 movie options as a drop down list for GX80 NTSC,
I'll keep hunting in the meantime
 
GX80-Wifi-Control.html

So, as I've stated a few times already, this find is awesome and makes me wish I didn't sell the GX85. I miss me some 5-axis. So much so, I've been looking to put together a simple one lens set up, really just for family stuff and for taking the camera into the city and other places I don't really want or need to bring my 5D3.
 I am really impressed by the organic look and rock steady IBIS from Olympus. If you haven't used one, there is a Night and Day difference between their incarnation and Panasonic's but for a whole lot cheaper, I can't complain about Panasonic's variant.
So this leads me to ask... is the 5-axis better with the heavier body of the G85? I remember they had some issues with IBIS in the beginning but I believe it's been resolved and I believe it was lens specific. Since I would only use it with a manual lens, I doubt it's relevant.
Also does anyone use the G85 with the battery grip and does that help settle the floaty Panasonic IBIS?
With this "hack" the GX85 is the cheaper price, but the G85 offers a bit more for not much more so it's probably worth it to me if the IBIS is more solid on the G85.
Also has anyone tested the hack with GX850? That camera doesn't have the IBIS, but it would be a great tripod cam for a two camera shoot with either the GX85 or G85 going handheld.

It's my understanding that this is really the apex find with this workaround... which in and of itself is really spectacular and BTM should be commended for figuring this out. If there is anything more to be had, now that's just gravy.
I believe he has offered the materials for others to test certain things but doesn't believe the higher bitrates, V Log, etc... is possible. 

Depending on your Android phone, some of them have a pop up warning when whatver its connected to via WiFi (the camera in this case) doesn't have an Internet connection. It then drops that connection (usually for something in range that does have internet) if you don't confirm quite quickly that it's OK. The pop up sometimes doesnt get to the front of the screen though depending on whats happening on other running apps.
Might be that but might not but no there is no fundamental difference why it wouldn't work on a phone. Unless you've got the Panasonic App open at the same time which will stop a simultaneous browser connection.

So, as some of you may know, I've been "experimenting" with having little chats with different Panasonic cameras over WiFi and after whispering in the GX80s ear last night, I may have come up with something quite interesting.
The first image is a grab from a GX80 using its Standard profile.
The second image is a grab from a GX80 that is definitely not using the Standard profile.......

OK
So for anyone wanting to try this, I have made a really simple method to do it.
I have tested this numerous times on my GX80 and it has lived to tell the tale but obviously do this at your own risk.
All that this process does is fool the camera into thinking its talking to the smartphone app and then the commands it sends are exactly what the smartphone app sends. Or would do if the smartphone app thought it was talking to a camera equipped with Cinelike D !
So as such it is only getting sent what the Panasonic app would be sending to it so there are no hacky or sneaky debug things getting sent to it. 
Again, though, proceed at your own risk.
Although I would say, if you’ve tried that region switching hack on YouTube with the 10 million key press combos during power up then you’re already brave enough to try this!
Bear in mind that my unit is a GX80 and the firmware is version 1.0
If you have a GX85 or have got a different firmware then I just don’t know because obviously I haven’t got any other devices to test it on.
 
Here we go then….
Follow these instructions exactly and you should have Cinelike D on your GX80/85
You will need a laptop or a phone with a browser, the camera and to download the simple html file attached.
 
1) Switch on camera and turn on wifi as though you were connecting the app and you should see the waiting screen on the camera
2) Load the Deploy Cinelike D.html file into your browser
3) Select ‘Handshake’ 
4) You should see the browser page change and it confirm that its connected to a GX80
5) Hit the back key on the browser
6) Select ‘Connect’
7) You should see the browser page change to say ‘ok’ and the camera give you an ‘Under Remote Control’ message
8) Wait until the camera screen shows you a live view
9) Hit the back key on the browser
10) Select ‘Deploy’
11) You should see the browser page change to say ‘ok’ and the camera should NOT now be displaying the Photo Style you had selected (i.e. Standard, Vivid etc) 
12) Cinelike D is now active on the camera
13) If you go into the menu on the camera and select Photo Style you will see that it is blank and you can’t navigate to other Photo Styles such as Standard etc. 
14) To restore the Photo Styles hit the back button on the browser and select ‘Restore’ and the camera will display the Standard photo style and you should then be able to go into Photo Styles and change them.
15) Repeat 9-14 to switch between them to your hearts content!
 
So, like other settings, the Cinelike D profile will persist when you switch the camera off so if you want to use the other Photo Styles again then you MUST go this process again to re-enable them.
However, if you would like to switch between them without using this method again (and who wouldn’t) here is a neat way round it.
When you’ve done Step 12 and got Cinelike D on, set all your other parameters (4K24p etc) as you’d like them and save these into C1 of the custom settings.
Then go to Step 14 and use the ‘Restore’ to get your standard Photo Styles back, set all your other parameters (4K24p etc) as you’d like them and then save these into C2 of the custom settings.
Now when you switch the camera on, you simply choose C1 to have Cinelike D or C2 for the standard Photo Styles and forget about using any nonsense about using browsers and wifi connections!
 
In couple of weeks I’m hoping to show you how you can do stuff like this and some other useful bits and pieces from a little hardware gadget that will work on the Panasonic cameras but have fun with this in the meantime.
DEPLOY CINELIKE D.html

Well it was never going to be a low light monster but I can let you have ISO50000 now if you want it as well
Top ISO6400 (max for video)
Middle ISO25600 (standard max for stills)
Bottom ISO50000 (modified max for stills)
It still reports it as 25600 in the exif funnily enough. And it doesn't display it onscreen either, just like it doesn't with the Cinelike D
So there seems to be a mismatch between the values it writes in the metadata and displays on screen with what it can actually be made to do. This is very potentially very interesting regarding a bitrate I thought I'd persuaded it to do earlier......

No, its easy and it does persist on switch off.
But that can be an issue as once you've enabled it you then needed to then use the wifi to go back to the other profiles.
And when I say 'you then needed to' I mean in the past tense as I've worked out a way to make it permanently switchable in camera using the C functions so you dedicate one of them to being Cinelike D and you must have one of the others set to Standard or another one of the profiles so you can switch back to them otherwise you'd have to use the wifi.
I'm working on something that will be quite the useful little standalone gadget for these Panasonic cameras but for now it can be done using a laptop or phone.
I do have an LX100.
It currently does 'something' and I just need to work out why that 'something' isn't currently the 'something' we want it to do.

Great work @BTM_Pix
On the GH5, maybe we could unlock that 400Mbit 4K mode ahead of time 
CineLikeD on the GX80 is a great start.

Thanks for this, I'll get on to it when I get back next week.

I was thinking more FS5 and C200 (though if it is at the 8000€ mark then the FS7 even with external interface and recorder isn't that far off) but completely take the point.
Ditto the mount as well actually.
I'm viewing this from underneath rather than above I suppose.
Cheap varicam rather than what was expected it might be which was an upscale lensless version of the DVX200. 
I still think the LS300 has shown that the Super35 sensor with MFT is a viable proposition but as its been a commercial failure then no one would be using it as a blueprint for success!
They could have had the Super35 sensor and the MFT mount though.  But as my reply above its probably not what the market they want it to be in wants is to have so I've completely misunderstood where they were going with it.
I remember how gutted I was when BM released the MFT version of the BMCC and how much of a more flexible solution it offered versus my EF mount version so I'm still bitter !!

The price has surprised me to be honest. CVP are saying it will be 'under 8000 Euros', which will be an ex-VAT price.
Thought it was more likely be a bit above the BM Ursa Mini Pro level and certainly not to be more than the new Canon.
Its not that its particularly wildly expensive for what it does but I just thought they'd be more aggressive.
Sony and Canon are the safe bets for most people in that price bracket so I'd have thought if you were going to take them on it would make sense to at the very least be a few quid cheaper rather than more expensive. Seems to me that someone looking to take a chance and go another way from Sony and Canon would be more tempted by the Ursa Mini Pro now?
The other surprise is the mount.
I just don't get the mount choice when you are an actual manufacturer of a wide range of MFT lenses and the users that you want to bring up to this new level of camera all own those lenses and all of the adapters to convert anything to that mount, why would you NOT put that mount on it?
JVC have already shown what a great combination the Super35 sensor with the MFT mount is. (By the by, JVC actually got their firmware update out a day late this week but I haven't had chance to put it on yet.)
I just do not understand it having an EF mount as a real benefit to anyone other than, erm, Canon. Who will now win whichever of these two cameras that you choose.

It needs to be on a camera, if you've still got a GH4?
If you can get it on to a camera then if you then connect to it with the cinelike D html file and send it the commands as per my posts further up to get what it sends back that would be a big benefit.

The mount is perfect for the customers they are targeting the EVA1 at. If they'd gone with the Micro Four Thirds size sensor and mount to match, the amount of extra M43 glass they would have sold would probably not compensate for the losses Panasonic would experience through damaging their presence in the C100/C300/rental market, which is all about Super 35 and EF lenses.
A good, pragmatic decision and I am sure the GH5 will sell a lot of extra Panasonic lenses to filmmakers any way!
I am not sure Panasonic quite has the ergonomics right yet... The form factor is nice and small now but the physical controls are 10 years past their sell-by date and need to be rethought, as does autofocus if they are to catch Canon.

It's cheaper than both the FS7 and the C300, and it overall should give a better image (and better specs, in general) than an FS5. URSA Mini Pro is still a bit of a gamble IMO. I'm still not convinced by the BMD image.
I attended the launch of the VaricamLT and it was expressed that EF mount is what most professional users want, if not PL. They did a lot of market research, and the VaricamLT has an interchangeable EF/PL mount.
The GH5 and Varicam lines are two quite different lines. To really be competitive, they were going to have to make a S35 camera, and MFT is simply not that. 
 
I mostly question the timeline: it seems they really wanted to get the jump on Canon. Why else would you release incomplete details of a camera (you don't even know yet what the Dual ISOs are...???) and without footage? Sony, Canon, RED, all release some sort of official footage when releasing a new camera... and I can't imagine any of them releasing a camera without an idea of what the native ISOs are.....
I wonder if maybe they were expecting the product to be at completion by Cinegear, but some unforeseen circumstance has kept that from being the case, but they'd committed to releasing details of a new camera... I just don't quite get it. The camera looks great, but how will we know until we see some footage..?

The price has surprised me to be honest. CVP are saying it will be 'under 8000 Euros', which will be an ex-VAT price.
Thought it was more likely be a bit above the BM Ursa Mini Pro level and certainly not to be more than the new Canon.
Its not that its particularly wildly expensive for what it does but I just thought they'd be more aggressive.
Sony and Canon are the safe bets for most people in that price bracket so I'd have thought if you were going to take them on it would make sense to at the very least be a few quid cheaper rather than more expensive. Seems to me that someone looking to take a chance and go another way from Sony and Canon would be more tempted by the Ursa Mini Pro now?
The other surprise is the mount.
I just don't get the mount choice when you are an actual manufacturer of a wide range of MFT lenses and the users that you want to bring up to this new level of camera all own those lenses and all of the adapters to convert anything to that mount, why would you NOT put that mount on it?
JVC have already shown what a great combination the Super35 sensor with the MFT mount is. (By the by, JVC actually got their firmware update out a day late this week but I haven't had chance to put it on yet.)
I just do not understand it having an EF mount as a real benefit to anyone other than, erm, Canon. Who will now win whichever of these two cameras that you choose.

Thanks BTM great work!

Thank you BTM for this discovery, Cinelike was the only feature I missed from my G7, it makes the GX80 ... just perfect !

BTM_Pix
GH4 2.3
When i open your first command i get this
"ok1.3GH4tele-normaltele-fastwide-normalwide-fasttouch_command_autooneshot_af_enablesetting_play_sort_mode_enableaf_size_change_pinch"
and for the second command i get this..
cam.cgi.webarchive
 
EDIT on handshake i get this
"err_non_support"
then i hit back-connect it says ok but it doesn't show any text

If you're after vintage, cheap, big constant aperture zoom range and parfocal then have a look at some B4 stuff.
I got this Angenieux for the LS300 as I needed it for the press conference stuff I do but obviously with it now being MFT mount I put it on the GX80 for a laugh!
Its 8.7mm f1.7 with a 15x zoom.
With the GX80 you have to deploy the internal doubler on the lens to get the image to fill the frame so its then 18mm-ish and f2.8 but the LS300 just laughs at that kind of behaviour and uses its VSM to scale it so you don't need the doubler. And it then makes it a 30x zoom by using its Prime Zoom function as well !
£200 for the lens, £70 for the adapter and about £50 for the battery plate, cable and Sony NP battery to power the servo zoom.
It is ever so slightly unbalanced on the GX80 obviously !
I'll put a bit of footage up of it when I get a chance if anyone is interested.
 

Yeah, it works exactly the same and same file for both. 
EDIT -
Sorry, I meant the same html file for both to implement it.
It needs two Custom settings on the camera available if you want to switch in camera between Cinelike D and the other profiles. GX80/85 have three available so still one spare for a more photography based or black and white configuration or whatever.

Yes, you just have to modify the html file so that when you hit 'Deploy' it takes you to B&H Website where you can then buy a GH5
 

What capture mode was it in when you sent the command?
On one single occasion I got it into that condition and it did a runaway recording that wrote no file data after I had to stop of with a battery pull.
I've found you can switch it to mov and it will record corrupted files.
All other attempts switch it to 4k24p and the files are recorded with that metadata. Though as I reported earlier with ISO50000 it doesn't register the right value in the metadata
 
I think there might be something in it reacting differently to the recording format command depending on what format it is currently in.
I'd tried both doing it from 1080 and 4k but there might be a combination of the variants that allows it. I can't do much on it right now but it needs a matrix of the settngs with different buttons to quickly but exhaustively test the combinations. 
A
EDIT!!!
FFS I've just spotted you are trying this on a G80 and NOT a GX80
No wonder I didn't get the same behaviour!
OK, same thing applies with the matrix to test the permutations
Closest relative I've got of it is the G7
I'll check it when I have some time