newfoundmass

It's unfortunate, as I'd really like to see more in-depth dives into the GH6. Seeing those that own one discussing it is great, but I'd love to watch some truly deep dives on those things being discussed. I'd especially love to see the difference in the workflow to the GH5. 

I'm surprised we haven't seen more in-depth reviews yet. I suppose that has been replaced by the "first look" reviews where they base it on pre-release cameras/firmware? But there hasn't been a lot of talk about it post release.

On 4/22/2022 at 12:15 PM, newfoundmass said:

I know there are better options out there that would do the same thing that I use it for, but during the pandemic and all the uncertainty it has brought, I really realized that instead of "upgrading" stuff I'd use it until the wheels fall off. I've spent thousands and thousands of dollars over the years that, in hindsight, I didn't NEED to spend. If I hadn't I would've been in a much better position after nearly 2 years of canceled jobs, etc.

So this is funny... just a couple days after posting this a friend gave me a really, really good deal on a Panasonic S5, and so I am now the owner of a Panasonic Lumix S5 🤦‍♂️

I was just offered a really good deal on an S5 with a cage and lenses, but when looking it seems there's no third party battery grip available yet? How is that possible?! 

3 hours ago, kye said:

I'm not even sure WTF we're talking about here any more..  

Sure, phones are "real cameras", no-one uses "real cameras" any more, people don't care about digital clipping as long as they can tell who is in the photo, and if people don't know what the specification is called then the effects in the image don't matter or are somehow invisible until you can memorise the acronym and then they magically become visible.

I now feel much more educated, and it's definitely all very relevant to the GH6 and it's dual-gain technology.

No one forced you to respond to my initial post about dynamic range, and no one forced you to be rude because others think differently about it than you do. 

Everyone has different philosophies when it comes to filmmaking and video. This forum would be much better, and much more informative, if we moved beyond just talking about specs and also shared our philosophies, knowledge and experiences. Those are my favorite posts. 

Give me the threads where people actually share their experiences and thoughts about a camera they're using instead of yet another discussion about dynamic range, and why a camera is no good because it doesn't have 16 stops when camera X does for less money. 

The average person filming their kid's ball game on their phone probably don't care if the sky is a bit blown out as long as they can see their kid playing clearly. I have never had a conversation with the average person about it, so I genuinely don't know, but do they even know what dynamic range is? Do a majority of people even know what HDR stands for, or what it really means on their TV? I literally never hear anyone outside our bubble talk about it.

7 hours ago, IronFilm said:

I too once used that as well! Was my first ever audio recorder the H1

I know there are better options out there that would do the same thing that I use it for, but during the pandemic and all the uncertainty it has brought, I really realized that instead of "upgrading" stuff I'd use it until the wheels fall off. I've spent thousands and thousands of dollars over the years that, in hindsight, I didn't NEED to spend. If I hadn't I would've been in a much better position after nearly 2 years of canceled jobs, etc.

2 hours ago, kye said:

Think of it like diffusion.

I fundamentally disagree - people will notice and will complain HARD when there isn't enough DR.

"Why is the sunset white?" "Why are the people in front of the sunset pitch black?"

What you are saying above is essentially "People don't care about DR, assuming that they're not operating the camera, and assuming that whoever did operate the camera either controlled the scene to not exceed the DR of the camera, or filtered out all the shots without enough DR so that the person only saw shots where the camera had enough DR".

That's a VERY different statement than they don't care.

The examples you use are the exception, not the rule. People focus on the story first, not whether they can see what's on the outside of a window for a couple of seconds during a shot. I don't mean to be condescending, but when I first started working in video in 1997 the cameras we had couldn't touch even the lowest end cameras released in the last 10 years in terms of dynamic range. We still filmed commercials, television, and (others, not me personally) low budget films with them though. People didn't poo poo that content because the cameras lacked the dynamic range of an Arri or RED, and most wouldn't now. Indeed, there are still commercials, television, and films that are filmed today on lower end cameras with so-so dynamic range, that are aired on television and streaming services without most noticing or caring that they don't have amazing DR. Do I notice it? Yeah, but most people aren't you and me.

If you have a camera that has great dynamic range, that's awesome! It's a very good thing that we have access to cameras that are capable of so much more than what we had to work with when I was young and just starting on my video journey, but the lack of DR never stopped us then, and it shouldn't stop anyone now. Story will always be most important, and if you have a compelling story that's far more important. Stop worrying about a couple stops of dynamic range and just create something, especially when most of the people viewing it won't think "gee, that was pretty good but I wish it had more dynamic range!"

Dynamic range is great, but it's one of those things that only people like us notice. As long as it's not absolutely horrible, the average viewer isn't going to notice. In all the stuff I've delivered from my GH3, GH5, G85, and GX85 over the last 10 years, not one person has ever complained about "dynamic range" even if *I* personally had quite a few instances where I wish I'd had more. If anything, having cameras with limited dynamic range has helped me grow and learn; I learned to expose for windows and then add lights to subjects during interviews to make up for using cameras that didn't have great dynamic range. Did it take a little extra work and equipment? Yeah. But I don't know, it never felt like that big of a deal to me.

On 4/14/2022 at 6:27 AM, IronFilm said:

Zoom H1 zombie rig, horrible no-budget setup not suitable for the purpose. 

I still use this set up 🤣

It's "good enough" for the stuff I use it for. I'll keep using it until they stop working, then I'll get something better! 

Good old Levelator! I use to wish they'd turn it into a VST. I *think* I've gotten good enough at audio that I don't need to anymore, but back in the day it I thought it was voodoo the way it'd make things sound. 

On 4/19/2022 at 1:11 AM, MrSMW said:

My old XT3's got pretty hot, but never had a shut off or even a warning.

The recording limit probably helped play a part in it not overheating, I imagine? 

Continuous recording for at least 2-3 hours at a time is a must for me. That's how long a first half of a pro-wrestling event can be before intermission. 

I COULD start and stop recording at points, but between all my cameras and audio recorders, and often only being a one or two person crew, it's just easier to be able just record.

So far Panasonic has been the only one to be able to do this reliably with their mirrorless cameras. If the A7iv didn't have overheating problems I'd probably have heavily considered leaving for Sony in the next year or two, but for now I'm staying with M43 to see how things play out. I really quite like Fuji colors though, so I'd love for them to be able to deliver. 

18 hours ago, Django said:

Fujirumors claims no active cooling... alongside 8K that surely means overheating. 

As a pro, overheating is my #1 concern. With high-resolution & 10-bit manufacturers really need to factor in air cooling. All the features in the world doesn't mean a damn thing if your camera can't make it through the day without bricking.

 

Very much the same, and the primary reason I invested so much into M43. I cannot accept a camera that has even the slightest chance of overheating for my work. I need to be able to record for hours and hours in sweltering venues without any issues. 

If they can put out a camera that has no recording limits and no overheating issues I'd be VERY interested, BUT Fuji really needs to revamp their lenses for video.

No battery grip def makes this a no go for me. It makes no sense to me, given how power hungry the camera is. Having to add external power just doesn't work for me when I'm running and gunning. I want as small of a package as possible.

Does the GH6 really not have the ability to add a battery grip?

1 hour ago, webrunner5 said:

 It's not unusable it's undependable, big difference. 

It's really not. Once you figure out how it works, and work towards its strength, it's very reliable.

Do I wish that it was Canon or Sony level? Sure, especially given my belief that not moving towards PDAF has hurt the format's image with consumers who think they NEED it and have put it at risk, but it's not that important to me. I'll be filming pro-wrestling matches with it tomorrow.

I wish I hadn't deleted the original video, but it did, in my opinion, show that the GH5's AF is "good enough" and gets an unfair rap. I still stand by that. It won't win awards, but people that say it's unusable, I just can't agree with.

Excellent as always, Andrew!

10 hours ago, Rob6 said:

What lenses do you guys recommend for the gh6? What are your favorites for the micro 4/3 system. Looking at getting one for a b or c camera for video at events. Thanks!

Also why can't they have it record in prores on the cfexpress and then some other format on the sd card like h.265. The R5 does something like there were it can write raw to the cfexpress and lower quality h.265 to the sd card...

Depends on what you prefer, zooms or primes? If you're looking to get the best stabilization you'll probably want to stick with Panasonic lenses, though I prefer Olympus lenses myself (even though I only own 1.)

The 12-35mm f2.8 and the 35-100mm f2.8 are both decent. Their Olympus counterparts are better, but you lose dual IS with them. They're not that different, they just feel better built, are a bit sharper, and have the manual focus clutch. I own the 7-14mm f2.8 since the Panasonic equivalent is only an f4. It is such a nice, premium feeling lens. But I own 2 of the 12-35mm and 1 of the 35-100mm Panasonic and I'm happy with them. 

For primes the 25mm f1.7 is a great value, the 42.5mm f1.7 is an excellent portrait/interview lens, and the 15mm f1.7 is also excellent. I have almost all the primes myself, but those are arguably the best bang for your buck as far as Panny is concerned. They have some really nice f1.2 and 1.4 but they're quite pricey. I've heard great things about the Sigma primes too. 

Low light is always one of those things people complain about even though it's one of the easiest things to work around. I've never had problems with the GH5 even in concert venues and filming pro-wrestling.

I was utterly disgusted when I saw this earlier. Things seem so bleak right now. 

The opening made me laugh so much! 

I am hoping they rush a firmware update to fix the issues you're having. 

One of the most interesting things I've noticed in the reviews so far is how good the colors look, and how accurate they remain even at high ISOs. While Canon and Sony beat them in low light, their colors get gross the higher you get while the GH6's colors still look good (though noisy.) 

1 hour ago, mercer said:

Thanks, I'm hoping it can handle a 1hr. 20min. 1080p ProRes4444 timeline? Would 16gb RAM be enough?

I have a M1 Pro 10-core CPU and 16-core GPU with 16gb of RAM and have had no problems with a 4 hour multicam timeline in ProRes 422 with each camera color corrected and motion graphics/lower thirds. I'd be very surprised if you had any issues. 

1 hour ago, Video Hummus said:

By definition Depth from Defocus (DfD) achieves focus by this pulsing of focus. I’m not sure you can completely eliminate it…except for…you know…using phase detection instead.

I didn't know if there was a way for the processor to do it computationally and then apply it to the recorded image.