Jump to content
Andrew Reid

Panasonic GH5 - all is revealed!

Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, Cinegain said:

I guess you guys have got more clientele per store over there. Hell, I even bought from B&H once (when the Panasonic 25mm f/1.7 was 99 bucks). I guess if you have a bit more local business there, you might have better odds, that's why I'm not really into pre-ordering, unless doing so makes you eligible for certain perks (like a freebie (memory card, battery grip, etc)). But this time around, I'm just waiting for a possible 12-35mm II kit to drop? If it's like the Leica 12-60, you can save up to 300 bucks by getting the kit. The 12-60 Leica is the same kind of money as the 12-35mm II. But we kinda know the 12-35mm II is primarily a little cosmetic upgrade, the iris should be smoother and I guess the Dual I.S. 2.0 compatibility is a marketing ploy to get you upgrading from the old one. Believe in some instances the older one seems to perform better optically? That's interesting. Anyways, 999,- I find quite the stretch, not sure the value is there at that price. At 300,- off (that's like almost the price of the battery grip or XLR unit), count me in. And while I wait for that to happen, or not... there's also the upcoming FW upgrades! I don't see much use in getting a better bitdepth, but then sticking to 150Mbps, so... it's like even more compressed. So, as soon as the 400Mbps drops, count me in! Gives me a little more time to make some more memories with the old cameras before selling them off.

I wonder how much that will add in the end. I've seen quite a few sources that claimed that 400Mbps All-I is actually more compressed than 150Mbps Long GOP so the All-I will maybe give you slightly better motion & quality when there's a lot of movement but no image quality boost in most cases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
EOSHD Pro Color for Sony cameras EOSHD Pro LOG for Sony CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs
Just now, Phil A said:

I wonder how much that will add in the end. I've seen quite a few sources that claimed that 400Mbps All-I is actually more compressed than 150Mbps Long GOP so the All-I will maybe give you slightly better motion & quality when there's a lot of movement but no image quality boost in most cases.

I tend to think it will up the quality a notch where it matters but it's all just guessing, cause the compression is such a complicated thing and there are so many variables in play.. Let's hope Panny's engineers know what they're doing. Meanwhile, there's also a petition making rounds: https://www.change.org/p/panasonic-introduce-4k-4-2-2-ipb-400mbps-and-fhd-4-2-2-ipb-200mbps-modes-for-panasonic-gh5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Cinegain said:

I guess you guys have got more clientele per store over there. Hell, I even bought from B&H once (when the Panasonic 25mm f/1.7 was 99 bucks). I guess if you have a bit more local business there, you might have better odds, that's why I'm not really into pre-ordering, unless doing so makes you eligible for certain perks (like a freebie (memory card, battery grip, etc)). But this time around, I'm just waiting for a possible 12-35mm II kit to drop? If it's like the Leica 12-60, you can save up to 300 bucks by getting the kit. The 12-60 Leica is the same kind of money as the 12-35mm II. But we kinda know the 12-35mm II is primarily a little cosmetic upgrade, the iris should be smoother and I guess the Dual I.S. 2.0 compatibility is a marketing ploy to get you upgrading from the old one. Believe in some instances the older one seems to perform better optically? That's interesting. Anyways, 999,- I find quite the stretch, not sure the value is there at that price. At 300,- off (that's like almost the price of the battery grip or XLR unit), count me in. And while I wait for that to happen, or not... there's also the upcoming FW upgrades! I don't see much use in getting a better bitdepth, but then sticking to 150Mbps, so... it's like even more compressed. So, as soon as the 400Mbps drops, count me in! Gives me a little more time to make some more memories with the old cameras before selling them off.

Agreed on the preorder thing....unfortunately in the US they don't offer the GH 12-60 Panny/Leica lens that I wanted...so $1000 later!...I never used the 200 Mbps Intra on the GH4 as it did not produce the best image quality...I have read that under extremely difficult motion conditions the Intra can perform better...so I could see a need for using the 400 Intra upgrade where movement is more important than image...I record almost exclusively at 800 Mbps in prores on an external recorder....best image and best editing results on my Mac...however the current 150Mbps in the GH5 in the right hands (always the case with any camera regardless what some on the forum may say) produces beautiful results...still won't have mine for a month, so you may beat me to shooting with it...envy you for being able to save real $'s on these kits though....their glass is getting pricey, but it's also getting really good!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Phil A said:

I wonder how much that will add in the end. I've seen quite a few sources that claimed that 400Mbps All-I is actually more compressed than 150Mbps Long GOP so the All-I will maybe give you slightly better motion & quality when there's a lot of movement but no image quality boost in most cases.

This little short article may help shed a some light on the subject.

http://www.dslrvideocollege.com/all-i-vs-ipb-what-do-they-mean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

This little short article may help shed a some light on the subject.

http://www.dslrvideocollege.com/all-i-vs-ipb-what-do-they-mean

I would expect everyone to know those basics from the article, the question is: how much more data rate will you need in All-I to match the quality of Long GOP? If it's 3 times, you already lose quality with the 400 Mbps codec. @Fritz Pierre is of course right about the "in the right hands" comment, but those also do magic with 8bit 4:2:0 material in 100 Mbps.

I've seen a table with comparison of the different compression levels but I can't recall where, I'll edit it in when/if I find it.

EDIT: here we go. Apparently the 400Mbps All-I should be somewhat better. http://wolfcrow.com/blog/thoughts-on-comparing-8-bit-and-10-bit-footage-from-the-panasonic-gh5/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

This little short article may help shed a some light on the subject.

http://www.dslrvideocollege.com/all-i-vs-ipb-what-do-they-mean

Great article...it also serves to boggle the mind at the complexity of what happens in a digital camera at such speed, to produce the image, as opposing to a lens allowing an exposure via, in the case of motion, a 180 degree mechanical shutter onto a light sensitive film frame...technology is truly amazing in some areas!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Phil A said:

I would expect everyone to know those basics from the article, the question is: how much more data rate will you need in All-I to match the quality of Long GOP? If it's 3 times, you already lose quality with the 400 Mbps codec. @Fritz Pierre is of course right about the "in the right hands" comment, but those also do magic with 8bit 4:2:0 material in 100 Mbps.

I've seen a table with comparison of the different compression levels but I can't recall where, I'll edit it in when/if I find it.

I am guessing the 400mbs All-I will be No better than what we have now, other than maybe help with motion smearing, tearing. But for critical editing it will help, but at the cost of a LOT more data, ergo, needing a Bigger SD card. And I think your 3x times is in the ball park.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Phil A said:
11 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

 

I would expect everyone to know those basics from the article, the question is: how much more data rate will you need in All-I to match the quality of Long GOP? If it's 3 times, you already lose quality with the 400 Mbps codec. @Fritz Pierre is of course right about the "in the right hands" comment, but those also do magic with 8bit 4:2:0 material in 100 Mbps.

I've seen a table with comparison of the different compression levels but I can't recall where, I'll edit it in when/if I find it.

If you don't mind wading through a lot of pages on DVXUser, there is a detailed explanation in the GH5 is coming thread on this very subject....and of course storage media is going to be the bottleneck in this new FW update and codec...that's why I like Prores...I already have the large fast SSD's and my slower Sandisks in SD seems to work seemlessly in the current 150Mbps acquisition 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Fritz Pierre said:

Great article...it also serves to boggle the mind at the complexity of what happens in a digital camera at such speed, to produce the image, as opposing to a lens allowing an exposure via, in the case of motion, a 180 degree mechanical shutter onto a light sensitive film frame...technology is truly amazing in some areas!!

Yeah it has to be incredible the data that is moved around on these modern Digital Cameras. Scary stuff LoL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Brother said:

There's only so much fiddling with settings can achieve if the tech isn't quite there in the first place. There's a ton of videos and posts where people explore the autofucus settings of the GH5 and everyone pretty much comes to the same conclusion. Sure, there's a sweetspot for AF usage but at that sweetspot the autofocus is still no way near the competition.

I really like the GH5 but if i ever needed good reliable AF on a paid job where retakes might not be possible i would leave the GH5 at home.

 

Anyways, my car can be unable to beat a Ferrari, but if it takes me to wherever the Ferrari or any other takes me, I can still drive it without much further complaints.

No GH5 here yet, but seems pretty enough this AF performance or tap to focus workaround (without mention the focus pulling feature!):

And please don't tell me touchscreen focus is not a valid solution because it is perhaps the best AF way to ever select... AF.

In any camera for any setup. Our brain is surely brighter to handle the job than a machine. Period.

Here's another example that I am not alone on this one:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Emanuel said:

Anyways, my car can be unable to beat a Ferrari, but if it takes me to wherever the Ferrari or any other takes me, I can still drive it without much further complaints.

No GH5 here yet, but seems pretty enough this AF performance or tap to focus workaround (without mention the focus pulling feature!):

And please don't tell me touchscreen focus is not a valid solution because it is perhaps the best AF way to ever select... AF.

In any camera for any setup. Our brain is surely brighter to handle the job than a machine. Period.

Here's another example that I am not alone on this one:

 

"tap to focus workaround" and "focus pulling feature" is not the same as reliable CAF. I'm not saying touchscreen autofocus is a bad thing, but for every shot every time? Come on man... What about gimbal and steadicam shots, are you going to press the screen a few times every second?

We have different views on what would be acceptable performance on a paid gig, that's all.

Share this post


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

"tap to focus workaround" and "focus pulling feature" is not the same as reliable CAF. I'm not saying touchscreen autofocus is a bad thing, but for every shot every time? Come on man... What about gimbal and steadicam shots, are you going to press the screen a few times every second?

We have different views on what would be acceptable performance on a paid gig, that's all.

For sure. My paid gigs normally use manual focus and focus puller 100% of the time, so focus pulling feature seems more appealing to me than a machine making the decisions on the operator's behalf.

In any case, it is rather possible to use touchscreen focus for gimbal shots. Mobile app can also be of a great help.

To me, this AF minus is absolutely nonsense. I never put my hands on one yet, but I am pretty sure this camera is able to produce proper AF if the operator knows to workaround eventual limitations.

On the other hand, show me 4K/60p coupled to CAF for same price and size.

I guess I wouldn't even consider the AF ticket anyway. Tap to focus is much more reliable.

Horses for courses? To each his/her own? We can't all of us be stuck in the same yellow color, oh yeah :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Brother said:

Except when there's no other way than autofocus on a piad gig. Other than that, agreed :) 

There are obviously countless distinct paid gigs. Where AF can be much more useful than only MF, focus pulling and so on. Not even less PRO-like because of that. A wedding shooter, as for instance, is as much professional as a feature film focus puller. Well, if both paid ; )

The point is the fact GH5 has no bad AF.

Imagine a pretty woman with a difficult temper. My best second half, for example. Speaking literally : )

I won't dismiss her because the situation requires much much harder work from me... ;-)

 

I bet handling the GH5 AF system will be easier, after all :-D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Emanuel said:

There are obviously countless distinct paid gigs. Where AF can be much more useful than only MF, focus pulling and so on. Not even less PRO-like because of that. A wedding shooter, as for instance, is as much professional as a feature film focus puller. Well, if both paid ; )

The point is the fact GH5 has no bad AF.

Imagine a pretty woman with a difficult temper. My best second half, for example. Speaking literally : )

I won't dismiss her because the situation requires much much harder work from me... ;-)

 

I bet handling the GH5 AF system will be easier, after all :-D

Agree to disagree about the GH5 autofocus then :) But in the end, what do i know? I take others words for it since i don't use it myself. Panasonic released a statement saying they're working on improving the autofocus so i might give it a go in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Brother said:

Agree to disagree about the GH5 autofocus then :) But in the end, what do i know? I take others words for it since i don't use it myself. Panasonic released a statement saying they're working on improving the autofocus so i might give it a go in the future.

There's surely room to improve it. I just think there's use for the camera AF as it is now.

GH5 AF looks like very interesting beyond the appearances.

More than the reverse hype.

IMHO, Max Yuryev's fault. Photo Joseph's too.

Can't understand how Panasonic has swallowed such loss. To my book, there is lot of work to do and clean the house inside the brand.

Jan (Livingston) is retired now. Barry Green is out of office. Poor camera maker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Emanuel wait a minute... you don't even own a GH5 yet? Or did I misread that comment a few up?

But to add to the discussion, when I owned the FZ2500, single point touch af worked a lot better than I though it would. If you are a one man band operator and use only native lenses, it may work better than some of the weird focus rings on m4/3 lenses... I know I liked it better than the manual ring on the FZ2500... and that manual ring wasn't the worse I've ever used. 

Share this post


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...