Jump to content

Panasonic G85 review - is there any need to get an Olympus E-M1 Mark II for video?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 635
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

You're not wrong about Oly.  And I shoot Fuji as well, so all these things are part of the mixed bag.  The thing is, when we're talking price, when we're looking at cameras within similar classes, the

Micro Four Thirds is increasingly going up-market and into pro territory, but unfortunately new Panasonic and Olympus cameras are getting more and more expensive by the day. Thankfully the G85 is

I'm currently NOT eating paella  I'm eating tapas It does the same on the G7 so I'll look at it when I resume work on Monday I have an idea that will probably work 

Posted Images

2 hours ago, Cinegain said:

Tom Antos just did a video on dynamic range between different cameras including those, perhaps a decent watch:

 

Superb test!

To me the G85 disappoints!  Too bad he did not test Standard or Natural in comparison.

Look at the image and in particular the color towards the darks, it's green! 

And while clearly above the noise level on the scope the second lowest block is actually not visible on the image which is a mystery to me:

cined.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, jonpais said:

@Cary Knoop Those are ND filters he uses for the chart. They are not perfect gray or perfect black. Each camera Tom uses reproduces the colors differently. Different lenses also have different color reproduction. That is what color correction is for.

I realize that but only the G85 color seems completely inconsistent and the last block (or last two blocks) are not visible.

One thing I noticed is that he recorded with data levels for the Panasonic G85.

All cameras are recorded with video levels while only the Panasonic G85 cameras is recorded with data levels. 

When the clips are merged the data levels where not brought into video level range. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ten stops is an excellent result, especially for a camera that cost me only $725.00 USD. It is similar to the GH4 and around the same as an Ursa Mini 4K costing $3,500.00. There are other factors aside from dynamic range to consider when purchasing a camera, such as usability (ergonomics, EVF, stabilizer, etc.), reliability, ecosystem (compatible lenses), image quality (WB, skin tones, color reproduction, etc.) as well as cost. If I'm going to shoot out on the street, I know which camera I'll be taking with me: the G85. Because with the GH4, I'll have to bring along a tripod, a gimbal or a monopod just to keep it from shaking. Any one of the cameras Tom tests can yield excellent results in the right hands. If you're vlogging or producing content for the Internet, you're probably not going to reach for an Ursa Mini. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, jonpais said:

Ten stops of light is excellent for a camera that cost me only $725.00 USD, and a result about as good as an Ursa Mini 4K, a camera costing $3,500. The G85 and the GH4 are very close in dynamic range, but other factors, such as usability (stabilizer, ergonomics) and image quality (skin tones, noise, WB, etc..) are also important. Any of the cameras he tested can produce excellent results in the right hands. If I am going to be doing handheld work, I am going to reach for the G85, not the GH4. I won't need a rig, gimbal or tripod to keep the camera from shaking. Each camera has strengths and weaknesses. You choose the camera for a particular job. If you are vlogging or producing content for internet consumption, you aren't going to shoot with an Ursa Mini. 

How is the G85 inconsistent? 

While all cameras record different tints they are all consistent with decreasing luminance values, except for the G85 which goes from some yellowish/orange to green

color-compare.jpg

The Sony looks very impressive especially price/performance wise!

It would be interesting to find out how well the GH5 is going to compare to the Sony.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

As Tom Antos says, "It really comes down to your skills as a photographer. All of these cameras can be used by serious filmmakers." The camera they used for their discussion at the beginning and end of the 'shootout' was a GH4. The Lumix G85 could have been intercut seamlessly with that footage and nobody would be able to tell the difference. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Cary Knoop said:

While all cameras record different tints they are all consistent with decreasing luminance values, except for the G85 which goes from some yellowish/orange to green

color-compare.jpg

The Sony looks very impressive especially price/performance wise!

It would be interesting to find out how well the GH5 is going to compare to the Sony.

 

If using iso200, Natural contrast -5 and idynamic low the GH4 dark bars would be much more visible. Iso200 is GH4 native iso! Iso400 is blurred by NR.

I wonder why there is a soft flare around the brightest bar in G85. Is the lens same as in GH4?

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Vesku said:

If using iso200, Natural contrast -5 and idynamic low the GH4 dark bars would be much more visible. Iso200 is GH4 native iso! Iso400 is blurred by NR.

Interesting you mention that because all way non-scientific tests I have done seem to indicate ISO 200 is just better than ISO 400. 

I do not think contrast and iDynamic will change the charts.  Contrast just rearranges the luminance values it gets from the sensor it does not get any new information.  IDynamic changes the local contrast of the darks which would cause the horizontal lines on the scope to be angled.

See for instance this article about iDynamic:

http://www.dvinfo.net/article/production/panasonic-gh4-dr-and-gamma-timelapse-and-more.html

And here is a comparison:

CDM-iDynOff.jpg

CDM-iDynHigh.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cary Knoop said:

Superb test!

To me the G85 disappoints!  Too bad he did not test Standard or Natural in comparison.

According to Tom's tests, the a6300 has twice the dynamic range of the GH4. Why do you think he didn't reach for the Sony instead of the lowly Panasonic to shoot this episode? Because professionals choose their equipment based on many factors, not just test charts. What lenses you use; your skill as a photographer; and your editing and color grading ability are going to make more of a difference in the end than these test charts. Kendy Ty could do more with a $400.00 Rebel T3i than you or I could do with an Alexa. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, jonpais said:

According to Tom's tests, the a6300 has twice the dynamic range of the GH4. Why do you think he didn't reach for the Sony instead of the lowly Panasonic to shoot this episode? Because professionals choose their equipment based on many factors, not just test charts. What lenses you use; your skill as a photographer; and your editing and color grading ability are going to make more of a difference in the end than these test charts. Kendy Ty could do more with a $400.00 Rebel T3i than you or I could do with an Alexa. 

I am not arguing as to the suitability I was merely commenting on the charts and how they were made.  :)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure if you asked him, Tom would try to explain. I thought you had the GX80/85? Then why do you seem so gleeful that the G80/85 does (or doesn't) meet your expectations? Why do you keep posting here if you dislike the camera so much? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Cary Knoop said:

Interesting you mention that because all way non-scientific tests I have done seem to indicate ISO 200 is just better than ISO 400. 

I do not think contrast and iDynamic will change the charts.  Contrast just rearranges the luminance values it gets from the sensor it does not get any new information.  IDynamic changes the local contrast of the darks which would cause the horizontal lines on the scope to be angled.

See for instance this article about iDynamic:

http://www.dvinfo.net/article/production/panasonic-gh4-dr-and-gamma-timelapse-and-more.html

And here is a comparison:

CDM-iDynOff.jpg

CDM-iDynHigh.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

Idynamic standard/high are too extreme. Low setting digs shadows a little without too much visible noise at iso200. Normally with contrast 0 the darkest shades are so near black that they visibly blend to black if not adjusted in post.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, jonpais said:

I'm sure if you asked him, Tom would try to explain. I thought you had the GX80/85? Then why do you seem so gleeful that the G80/85 does (or doesn't) meet your expectations? Why do you keep posting here if you dislike the camera so much? 

I am not sure why you are so argumentative, I was merely commenting on the test results in an objective way.  What is wrong with that?

I have the GX85 and I am happy with it but that does not mean I want to turn a blind eye to test results if they show this or any other camera to be performing less than others. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have downloaded that YT video and took out a frame from each camera, after they color corrected it, and eventhough the a6300 has some impressive DR and it deals almost equally well with highlights as the ursa 4.6k I much prefer the GH4 cine-d image over the sony s-log2, cine2 was even worse, the sony has that cold sterile look and somewhat bland colors, something that might be possible to correct through grading but just judging from what I see the gh4 has a much more pleasing look. The ursa 4.6k obviously has the best looking image where highlight handling stands out the most, that's where you see the 15 stops of DR at work..

Link to post
Share on other sites

All the graded examples are fine except for the Sony S-Log2, it is graded outside of video range (top is from the video, bottom is corrected):

sony-s-log2-levels.jpg

 

1 hour ago, Vesku said:

G85 has more NR in high iso than GH4. With good post processing the GH4 high iso video may be close to G85. Here is example of processed GH4 EOSHD review image vs original G85 image.

Yes, it is similar for the GX85, the noise reduction really kicks in at higher ISO's which makes the video look like a watercolor painting.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Qué ocurre que Panasonic ha hecho una chapuza jajajajajajaja El Panasonic G80 hace ruido y mucho. En Panasonic Me han dicho que es el sistema de reducción de polvo del sensor. Y esto es intolerable, ya que el ruido se hace incluso en las grabaciones. Yo he tenido varias con estabilizador y de reducción de polvo y ninguno ha hecho tanto ruido como este. El GX80 no  hace ruido. La Olympus no hace ningún ruido. El Sony ni siquiera se oía ningún ruido. Panasonic no nos han hecho un dulce de azúcar de la cámara? Ellos tienen que eliminar como lo hicieron con el estabilizador de un nuevo firmware que reduce el ruido que se escucha en la cámara cuando lo enciende. Puede desactivar el sistema cuando se está grabando vídeo. O se oye cuando se enchufa, pero luego se remueve. Esto arruina una cámara y que son pequeñas cosas que pueden ser corregidos.
Vamos a estar al tanto de este nuevo firmware 1.2

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...