canonlyme

Hey Guys,

Since starting in this forum I progressed from the GX80 to buying a Pocket 4k which I use for all documentary shoots and trying to built a showreel. 
Meanwhile, the non rigged out GX80 is way easier to take on trips and fun shoots and I still think it is one of the most underrated cameras in terms of price/performance.

For the last trip to Loen in Norway (where a rock falling into the lake caused a 70m wave extinguishing to villages in early 1900), I took the gx80. Normally I shoot CINE D with all settings around -2, but this time I decided to shoot a dialed down natural, and furthermore I heard on youtube that AVCHD supposedly holds up way better to grading. So I tested it and used the internal noise reduction and grain from davinci. 

What do you think? I am quite pleased with what I can get out of the 24mbit files, even with several nodes, vignettes etc. The opinion is well established that the Full HD on the gx80 seemed to look softer than on the g85 or g7. Even the slow-mo to me looks way better than what I am used to from the 24mbit 60p in mp4. 
Way easier to edit than 4k as well and easy on the storage. 

At 250 Dollars or Euros used, often including a lens, I think this camera is still a steal, especially for people in the mft ecosystem who need a second/third camera. In my backpocket I had a tascam dr05 to record audio and a short interview with a habitant of one of those villages. 

 

Hey Guys,

Since starting in this forum I progressed from the GX80 to buying a Pocket 4k which I use for all documentary shoots and trying to built a showreel. 
Meanwhile, the non rigged out GX80 is way easier to take on trips and fun shoots and I still think it is one of the most underrated cameras in terms of price/performance.

For the last trip to Loen in Norway (where a rock falling into the lake caused a 70m wave extinguishing to villages in early 1900), I took the gx80. Normally I shoot CINE D with all settings around -2, but this time I decided to shoot a dialed down natural, and furthermore I heard on youtube that AVCHD supposedly holds up way better to grading. So I tested it and used the internal noise reduction and grain from davinci. 

What do you think? I am quite pleased with what I can get out of the 24mbit files, even with several nodes, vignettes etc. The opinion is well established that the Full HD on the gx80 seemed to look softer than on the g85 or g7. Even the slow-mo to me looks way better than what I am used to from the 24mbit 60p in mp4. 
Way easier to edit than 4k as well and easy on the storage. 

At 250 Dollars or Euros used, often including a lens, I think this camera is still a steal, especially for people in the mft ecosystem who need a second/third camera. In my backpocket I had a tascam dr05 to record audio and a short interview with a habitant of one of those villages. 

 

Hey Guys,

Since starting in this forum I progressed from the GX80 to buying a Pocket 4k which I use for all documentary shoots and trying to built a showreel. 
Meanwhile, the non rigged out GX80 is way easier to take on trips and fun shoots and I still think it is one of the most underrated cameras in terms of price/performance.

For the last trip to Loen in Norway (where a rock falling into the lake caused a 70m wave extinguishing to villages in early 1900), I took the gx80. Normally I shoot CINE D with all settings around -2, but this time I decided to shoot a dialed down natural, and furthermore I heard on youtube that AVCHD supposedly holds up way better to grading. So I tested it and used the internal noise reduction and grain from davinci. 

What do you think? I am quite pleased with what I can get out of the 24mbit files, even with several nodes, vignettes etc. The opinion is well established that the Full HD on the gx80 seemed to look softer than on the g85 or g7. Even the slow-mo to me looks way better than what I am used to from the 24mbit 60p in mp4. 
Way easier to edit than 4k as well and easy on the storage. 

At 250 Dollars or Euros used, often including a lens, I think this camera is still a steal, especially for people in the mft ecosystem who need a second/third camera. In my backpocket I had a tascam dr05 to record audio and a short interview with a habitant of one of those villages. 

 

Hey Guys,

Since starting in this forum I progressed from the GX80 to buying a Pocket 4k which I use for all documentary shoots and trying to built a showreel. 
Meanwhile, the non rigged out GX80 is way easier to take on trips and fun shoots and I still think it is one of the most underrated cameras in terms of price/performance.

For the last trip to Loen in Norway (where a rock falling into the lake caused a 70m wave extinguishing to villages in early 1900), I took the gx80. Normally I shoot CINE D with all settings around -2, but this time I decided to shoot a dialed down natural, and furthermore I heard on youtube that AVCHD supposedly holds up way better to grading. So I tested it and used the internal noise reduction and grain from davinci. 

What do you think? I am quite pleased with what I can get out of the 24mbit files, even with several nodes, vignettes etc. The opinion is well established that the Full HD on the gx80 seemed to look softer than on the g85 or g7. Even the slow-mo to me looks way better than what I am used to from the 24mbit 60p in mp4. 
Way easier to edit than 4k as well and easy on the storage. 

At 250 Dollars or Euros used, often including a lens, I think this camera is still a steal, especially for people in the mft ecosystem who need a second/third camera. In my backpocket I had a tascam dr05 to record audio and a short interview with a habitant of one of those villages. 

 

Of course, I will share the video. I agree with you. Though with AVCHD I did not see my image break apart nearly as fast as I am used to. But knowing the noise level I also tried overexposing 1 or 2 stops, so I exposed to the right while still trying to fill the histogram. 
 
Thanks Indeed I made a vibrance note, because it is a great way to increase the look without going to far. I used a key to pick the less saturated part, skipped the skin tones and desaturated the rest.   

Hey Guys,

Since starting in this forum I progressed from the GX80 to buying a Pocket 4k which I use for all documentary shoots and trying to built a showreel. 
Meanwhile, the non rigged out GX80 is way easier to take on trips and fun shoots and I still think it is one of the most underrated cameras in terms of price/performance.

For the last trip to Loen in Norway (where a rock falling into the lake caused a 70m wave extinguishing to villages in early 1900), I took the gx80. Normally I shoot CINE D with all settings around -2, but this time I decided to shoot a dialed down natural, and furthermore I heard on youtube that AVCHD supposedly holds up way better to grading. So I tested it and used the internal noise reduction and grain from davinci. 

What do you think? I am quite pleased with what I can get out of the 24mbit files, even with several nodes, vignettes etc. The opinion is well established that the Full HD on the gx80 seemed to look softer than on the g85 or g7. Even the slow-mo to me looks way better than what I am used to from the 24mbit 60p in mp4. 
Way easier to edit than 4k as well and easy on the storage. 

At 250 Dollars or Euros used, often including a lens, I think this camera is still a steal, especially for people in the mft ecosystem who need a second/third camera. In my backpocket I had a tascam dr05 to record audio and a short interview with a habitant of one of those villages. 

 

I use both the GX85 and G85 with my GH5 and indeed, they all match wonderfully

@canonlyme GX85 produces a great image if graded or with right in camera look. I don´t like the HD as much as from G7 or G6, with a bit too much aliasing to my taste. In super low light noise reduction makes everything mushy. Other than that great camera and my to go little film friend. Now, if it´s ok for you to share your video, would be very cool to see your colors fly in motion.:) cheers

Hey Guys,

Since starting in this forum I progressed from the GX80 to buying a Pocket 4k which I use for all documentary shoots and trying to built a showreel. 
Meanwhile, the non rigged out GX80 is way easier to take on trips and fun shoots and I still think it is one of the most underrated cameras in terms of price/performance.

For the last trip to Loen in Norway (where a rock falling into the lake caused a 70m wave extinguishing to villages in early 1900), I took the gx80. Normally I shoot CINE D with all settings around -2, but this time I decided to shoot a dialed down natural, and furthermore I heard on youtube that AVCHD supposedly holds up way better to grading. So I tested it and used the internal noise reduction and grain from davinci. 

What do you think? I am quite pleased with what I can get out of the 24mbit files, even with several nodes, vignettes etc. The opinion is well established that the Full HD on the gx80 seemed to look softer than on the g85 or g7. Even the slow-mo to me looks way better than what I am used to from the 24mbit 60p in mp4. 
Way easier to edit than 4k as well and easy on the storage. 

At 250 Dollars or Euros used, often including a lens, I think this camera is still a steal, especially for people in the mft ecosystem who need a second/third camera. In my backpocket I had a tascam dr05 to record audio and a short interview with a habitant of one of those villages. 

 

I can fully agree - both GX80 and G80 seem to be great B-cams or a 'throw-it-in-your-backpack' alternatives, which video creators didn't really notice.
IMHO, they could be easily intercut with GHx series and I doubt anyone would notice.
I like your results very much, they look quite similar to what GHAlex offers - soft, yet vibrant and natural look.
Congrats!

Hey Guys,

Since starting in this forum I progressed from the GX80 to buying a Pocket 4k which I use for all documentary shoots and trying to built a showreel. 
Meanwhile, the non rigged out GX80 is way easier to take on trips and fun shoots and I still think it is one of the most underrated cameras in terms of price/performance.

For the last trip to Loen in Norway (where a rock falling into the lake caused a 70m wave extinguishing to villages in early 1900), I took the gx80. Normally I shoot CINE D with all settings around -2, but this time I decided to shoot a dialed down natural, and furthermore I heard on youtube that AVCHD supposedly holds up way better to grading. So I tested it and used the internal noise reduction and grain from davinci. 

What do you think? I am quite pleased with what I can get out of the 24mbit files, even with several nodes, vignettes etc. The opinion is well established that the Full HD on the gx80 seemed to look softer than on the g85 or g7. Even the slow-mo to me looks way better than what I am used to from the 24mbit 60p in mp4. 
Way easier to edit than 4k as well and easy on the storage. 

At 250 Dollars or Euros used, often including a lens, I think this camera is still a steal, especially for people in the mft ecosystem who need a second/third camera. In my backpocket I had a tascam dr05 to record audio and a short interview with a habitant of one of those villages. 

 

Hey Guys,

Since starting in this forum I progressed from the GX80 to buying a Pocket 4k which I use for all documentary shoots and trying to built a showreel. 
Meanwhile, the non rigged out GX80 is way easier to take on trips and fun shoots and I still think it is one of the most underrated cameras in terms of price/performance.

For the last trip to Loen in Norway (where a rock falling into the lake caused a 70m wave extinguishing to villages in early 1900), I took the gx80. Normally I shoot CINE D with all settings around -2, but this time I decided to shoot a dialed down natural, and furthermore I heard on youtube that AVCHD supposedly holds up way better to grading. So I tested it and used the internal noise reduction and grain from davinci. 

What do you think? I am quite pleased with what I can get out of the 24mbit files, even with several nodes, vignettes etc. The opinion is well established that the Full HD on the gx80 seemed to look softer than on the g85 or g7. Even the slow-mo to me looks way better than what I am used to from the 24mbit 60p in mp4. 
Way easier to edit than 4k as well and easy on the storage. 

At 250 Dollars or Euros used, often including a lens, I think this camera is still a steal, especially for people in the mft ecosystem who need a second/third camera. In my backpocket I had a tascam dr05 to record audio and a short interview with a habitant of one of those villages. 

 

Just a note for G80/G85 and GX80/GX85 users:
(this may be of interest to you, @canonlyme)
Consider disabling IBIS while shooting anamorphic.
 
Recently I took a look at my short video tests and noticed that there is a lot of swaying going on in them.
At first I thought that rolling shutter was to blame, but after further tests I concluded that this swaying has nothing to do with fast pans and it's visible even during some subtle movement.
 
Turns out IBIS in G85 doesn't like scopes.
 


Sorry for hijacking the thread!

I've tried the 4:3 4K Photo Mode with anamorphics on my G80/G85 (which shares many features with GX80/GX85) and, to be honest, I got better results when shooting standard 16:9 4K 24fps video.
Rolling Shutter in 4K Photo Mode is worse than in a regular video mode, IBIS doesn't seem to work that good, you can shoot only in 30fps and there is no Cine-D.
Sure, I get even more cropped image and I do have to crop out a lot of pixels, but it works for me.
 
Not saying it's the best solution, but maybe you'll like it more?

OK, well I've got a solution for you.
The live view to a phone works while recording the burst.
So your options are to use the free Panasonic Image App on your phone as a monitor or use an app like Gmonitor (Android or iOS) which is about $5 and is a more dedicated monitor app for showing the live stream.
There is some lag but it is actually pretty marginal and definitely usable.
Far, far more usable than the non-functioning HDMI port.

@BTM_Pix 2019 and I am still using my beloved and underrated gx80. The main problem for professional use is that the HDMI output get's blocked during photo burst mode. I would like to shoot 4/3 4k with the burst mode but when enabled the HDMI function gets blocked, not really, rather there come a sign transfered by the camera that photo mode is activated.

This is for shooting 4/3 anamorphic. Funnily enough, when I do switch back to the normal mode, I see the external monitor showing the correct image in 4/3 desqueezed for one split second before going back to the heavily cropped 16 9. (with anamorphic, this is 32 to 9). So I know that the camera could do this, but they do not allow it. Do you think, from your experience, there is any chance that the HDMI output could be manually enabled or hacked? 

cheers

I used Leeming Lut Pro and did not have any issues at all. It covers Cine D and HLG  All my childhood photos are on Minolta glass. https://www.leeminglutpro.com/

Thanks for your response. That is such a good insight!

When you are an artist, as a filmmaker, you find your own way of doing it and if it works and you have the time for it, I see no problem in this at all. In contrary, I think it is really nice if someone takes such passion and time for something, unless you would find out a much quicker way to do the same.

Yes, I chose minoltas not for their price, but I looked at comparisons of images and their special way to treat colors just pleased me the best. Now I am happy I could afford the whole lens set without spending too much. Something that vintage lenses do is they give a special treatment to colors, where if I would take the same effort in post to try to create something special and tweak around a lot, it would probably turn out garbage until I become much better at grading. 

Did you encounter any problems with bringing the clips from HLG to rec709/premiere color space? Because the way that HLG is filmed it introduces a greenish color tint from what I have learned. 
 
 

Thanks Julius, that sounds cool about documentary. I'm addicted to finding and creating the moving paintings in nature with anamorphic lens. I'm very old school with my approach to color. I like to get things as close as possible to what I'm seeing. It's really the anamorphic lens, taking lens and filters that are giving me my look. I color with Film Convert to give me the greens, blues and yellows I like. Even then I dial the preset way down. I then use Lumetri to tweak contrast and highlights. With Davinci you have more tools and flexibility but for nature work, I feel the glass takes care of 90% of the final image. for my workflow, it's kinda tedious and not for everyone. I de- stretch each shot in it's native resolution. Some shot's are 8k and some 5k. I then do a first pass color treatment and then export out a Pro Res HQ 8k or 5k .mov file with max bit depth and render. Each clip I export is 20-30 sec's even know I end up using 6-8 secs. I then reimport and edit on a 5k timeline and do additional tweaks if needed. I'm sure working in Davinci with proxies might make more scents but I'm building a library of nature footage and want to go back to clips. 
 The B&H and Minolta glass will create a very nice color pallet. 

Hey Ian, 

I think you have inspired me for my next documentary. I will try to recreate paintings of places in real life using anamorphic. What I am especially interested in is the grading.

I can imagine there are some important workflow steps for you, if you graded in davinci resolve. I really love the look and some tips to get to this "painting like" look would be greatly appreciated. This will also be my first project in Davinci, so I think I will try to get everything as good as I can in camera, exposure and white balance, so that I can edit without any grading in adobe and then grade the finally used, picture locked clips. I will try to use the Color management tools and tutorials in davinci as well. I also will try to use HLG combined with Cinelike D. And am going to use kowa for b&h with minolta lenses. 28mm, 50mm, 135mm, 70-210 mm. I am looking forward to hearing from you. Great movies. 

The same thing with the spots actually happened to me in india. Luckily I was doing hyperlapses so I could easily correct the spots in lightroom. Lesson learned, I always have the blower and a cloth with me now.

Cheers, 
Julius

I'm excited to share my new travel film I shot over 4 days in Yellowstone in August. This was my first video on GH5. I learned allot on this shoot. I hope you sit back and watch on a decent screen with some good sound and enjoy some CinemaScope nature bliss. Cheers.
Filmed on the Panasonic GH5. Filmed in HLG and Cine D profiles. Colored with Film Convert. Anamorphic lens used were the Baby Hypergonar 1.75x, Bolex 8/19 1.5x and 16/32 1.5x Anamorphot. The Rectilux 3FF-s variable diopter and closeup lens.
Taking lens used Pentax 300mm DA f4, MeVis 35mm f1.6, Carl Zeiss 100mm f2.8 and Pen F 38mm f1.8 with wide angle attachment in front.
 

If you enjoyed my Yellowstone film, you might like this. I filmed this over 1 day in the Grand Tetons National Park. 
 
 

I agree with you, the micro is very appealing at a lower budget. 

This is some of the bullshit you only read in online forums. If you say something like that, is is only because you are justifying paying more for the g85 over the gx80. The gx80 has equivalent 4k to the g85. That is what matters. If you really think that they process the image differently in fhd, then give me an official enginnering source or make that judgment over your own footage, do not just reference another test because you are lazy to do your own.
I think a couple of points have to be added here. 
The GX80 is by far the better professional budget option then the g85. Who cares if the fhd is worse then something else, you are not gonna buy a porsche and then only drive it at 100kms an hour, comparing the sound to a fiat. 
Why? In 4k, there is no visual difference to be seen to the gh5 4k, and equivalence to the g85 4k. We have recently shot a documentary and noone could tell much difference to the gh5, even at 200mbs, to the 100mbs 4k of the gx85. Feel free to post a screengrab with the gh5, I will give you one of my gx80 that will look as good.
You get the gx80 for around 200 to 300 bucks less then the g85. The gx85 is missing external audio jack, but this does not matter, since if you shoot professionally, you will not allow bad pre amps or camera sounds to go on your audio and go dual audio.

One other thing is weight, people say the gx80 is missing weight, but as a b-camera, this is a huge upside. We were shooting while hiking and carrying the gh5 on a gimbal/glidecam slash the gx80, we always ended up using the gx80 on the glideplus a 40mm voigtlander, and we got the most beutiful shots. 

The gx85 has professional features that if you go dual audio, you not really need and, if you have the same budget, it allows you to get a cage, grip and a zoom h1, which will take your gh5 audio apart.
To summarize, the gx85 is in my opinion the best price/value under 1000 dollars, its a beast. So getting the gx85 over the g85 is a no brainer. 
Comparing it to the gh3, I think the gh3 is a beautiful camera, and if there would be image stabilization, I would recommend the gh3 over the gx80. But ibis is still what kills the gh3. On top, I am currently building up anamorphic, and the gx85 allows you to shoot 4:3 in 4k photo mode, which the gh3 does not. On the other hand, the gh3 has internal audio (bad preamps). 
The gh3 also gives you better slow motion then the gx80 at 50mbit/s vs 28mbit/s.

The G7 is the gh3 with worse slow-motion and worse fhd, so I would go for the gh3 over the g7 and the gx80 beats the g7 as well because of ibis.

I don't wanna be mean but there has been some junk written in this thread about high iso and soft footage of the gx80.
 If you are gonna use iso higher iso than 1000 with a m43 camera, you are already doing something wrong. Without loss of IQ, you are gonna use fast lenses or lighting to shoot at the right light. 

I do own the gx80 and I can recommend over the g7 and g85 as a first cam, b-roll cam or professional b-cam, for a gimbal/glidecam for stuff like weddings, or as the first camera to get at the current state of technology (which is 4k) 
 

I agree with you, the micro is very appealing at a lower budget.