Jump to content

Panasonic GH5 - all is revealed!


Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Axel said:

Beautiful, and beautifully graded. I wouldn't hesitate to spend 1000 bucks for a superior lens. For this focal range, do you think it would beat the Sigma Art 50mm?

Thanks, Axel, but that video wasn't even graded. I've got the Sigma Art 50mm f/1.4, but I haven't even shot with it yet! (just a couple clips I never even used). Maybe I could shoot a comparison between the two sometime next week, if anyone's interested.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 3.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

"6K/24p Anamorphic Video Mode, while fun, is severely hampered by its 4:3 aspect ratio" UM! That's what an anamorphic mode is - 4:3 Someone let our dear friends at Cinema5D know.

Here are some 1080 JPEGS from a music video that I shot with the GH5 + SLR Magic anamorphic primes.  

A couple of quick screengrabs from a recent Jazz concert I shot. I must say I was super impressed with the GH5 on this one - not only it recorded for 1h30m straight with no issues but it did so on one

Posted Images

6 minutes ago, jonpais said:

Thanks, Axel, but that video wasn't even graded. I've got the Sigma Art 50mm f/1.4, but I haven't even shot with it yet! (just a couple clips I never even used). Maybe I could shoot a comparison between the two sometime next week, if anyone's interested.

Just tell me what you think, I trust your judgment. For me, it's a matter of NOT buying many different lenses. Thought of a second lens that could cover 50-100mm (FF-equ.) with the said two adapters instead of having three or four lenses.

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

Thanks, Axel, but that video wasn't even graded. I've got the Sigma Art 50mm f/1.4, but I haven't even shot with it yet! (just a couple clips I never even used). Maybe I could shoot a comparison between the two sometime next week, if anyone's interested.

Plenty should be interested with that comparison. A cursory search of YouTube's opening three pages shows comparisons between the Nocticron and Panasonic lenses and comparisons between the Sigma 50mm f1.4 and the Canon equivalents.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Davey said:

Plenty should be interested with that comparison. 

Okay, I'm not promising anything, but I'll try to do a comparison between the Nocticron and the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 and post it by sometime next week. I'm curious myself, and have to somehow justify having spent so much on a lens that just sits in my dry cabinet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@jonpais

34 minutes ago, jonpais said:

 

 

Beautiful, really pleasing...It's not the first time I like your shots because a overall balanced coloring and feeling, though NOT graded at all. Your shots prove that using and tweaking native in camera settings according to a certain shooting scenario, could be sometimes much more better than colour vandalism  dilettantish/misunderstood colour grading...Less is more...

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Arikhan said:

@jonpais

Beautiful, really pleasing...It's not the first time I like your shots because a overall balanced coloring and feeling, though NOT graded at all. Your shots prove that using and tweaking native in camera settings according to a certain shooting scenario, could be sometimes much more better than colour vandalism  dilettantish/misunderstood colour grading...Less is more...

Color vandalism - I am guilty of it!

jonpais, excuse me if I missed this somewhere else, can you link me to the threads where you elaborate on this "tweaking"?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Axel said:

Color vandalism - I am guilty of it!

jonpais, excuse me if I missed this somewhere else, can you link me to the threads where you elaborate on this "tweaking"?

I think Arikhan is just referring to my settings in Photo Style. When I shot with the GH4, I always used Natural, with Shadows at +1 or +2, Contrast and Sharpening dialed way down, and Saturation turned down just a touch. With the G85, I shoot Standard, with NR and Sharpening dialed all the way down, Saturation at default and contrast at -2. It's not that there's a huge difference in the files (to be honest, I've never done an A/B comparison), it's just that now I'm after something I can color correct quickly and upload to YouTube without having to do a lot of grading and using LUTs. 

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

...  it's just that now I'm after something I can color correct quickly and upload to YouTube without having to do a lot of grading and using LUTs. 

Yep!

Did you see this?

Imo it suggests that (for GH4 at least) Cine-D has some advantages over V-log (particularly since I am a dilettante if it comes to grading - but apparently I'm not exactly an exception). Imagine we could find some settings (sharpness, saturation, maybe a color shift, NR, that kind of thing) to find the perfect profile for us. And leave the butchering to the rest.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Axel said:

Yep!

Did you see this?

Imo it suggests that (for GH4 at least) Cine-D has some advantages over V-log (particularly since I am a dilettante if it comes to grading - but apparently I'm not exactly an exception). Imagine we could find some settings (sharpness, saturation, maybe a color shift, NR, that kind of thing) to find the perfect profile for us. And leave the butchering to the rest.

Yes, I've seen it, and it's given me a whole lot of heartache. Not the comparison itself, which is enlightening, but with a couple of forum members who seemed to be using the test to show what a horrible camera the G85 is. At least, that's how I felt at the time. The takeaway for me is that Tom Antos feels that all the cameras tested can be used successfully by serious filmmakers. I shied away from CineLike D in the past because when the GH4 was released, Dave Dugdale made a video (to the best of my recollection) that showed that it produced an orange cast, so I stuck with Natural because that was what people like Denver Riddle of Color Grading Central recommended for use with their LUTs. Now Dan Watson over at LearningCameras.com is encouraging me to try CineLike again, saying that perhaps it doesn't have the orange cast of the GH4. One advantage of CineLike with the GH4 is that it doesn't necessarily require an external recorder to get good results (to the best of my understanding, 8-bit produced some splotchiness with V-Log). Actually, some of the best colors I've seen yet from the GH4 were with V-Log, for example, one of the camera reviews over at TCSTV was shot in V-Log, and I thought it was one of the best-looking episodes they'd ever done. Anyhow, now that I'm trying to get an image that requires little knowledge of all the intricacies of color grading, going back to a flat profile would mean opening Pandora's box again (not sure if that's the right analogy). But I think I did promise to test it out, so...

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

Yes, I've seen it, and it's given me a whole lot of heartache. Not the comparison itself, which is enlightening, but with a couple of forum members who seemed to be using the test to show what a horrible camera the G85 is. At least, that's how I felt at the time. The takeaway for me is that Tom Antos feels that all the cameras tested can be used successfully by serious filmmakers. I shied away from CineLike D in the past because when the GH4 was released, Dave Dugdale made a video (to the best of my recollection) that showed that it produced an orange cast, so I stuck with Natural because that was what people like Denver Riddle of Color Grading Central recommended for use with their LUTs. Now Dan Watson over at LearningCameras.com is encouraging me to try CineLike again, saying that perhaps it doesn't have the orange cast of the GH4. One advantage of CineLike with the GH4 is that it doesn't necessarily require an external recorder to get good results (to the best of my understanding, 8-bit produced some splotchiness with V-Log). Actually, some of the best colors I've seen yet from the GH4 were with V-Log, for example, one of the camera reviews over at TCSTV was shot in V-Log, and I thought it was one of the best-looking episodes they'd ever done. Anyhow, now that I'm trying to get an image that requires little knowledge of all the intricacies of color grading, going back to a flat profile would mean opening Pandora's box again (not sure if that's the right analogy). But I think I did promise to test it out, so...

With A7Rii I can do better with minimally tweaked CINE4 than with s-log. Don't care if colors are more "baked in" as long as they are not too much off. My request was not meant to let you do my homework, but I appreciate your input.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Axel

I visited a pro colorist in London during last fall break to get some insights in the industry and methodology. I was really fascinated but the quintessence was: There is no good "wannabe colorist"...If one doesn't have thousands of hours of experience in coloring and with different cameras, don't color the footage. It will end in a massacre...
Your statement on Pana footage is quite interesting, because I've discussed this on some examples in London. The guy likes the GH4 colors and said "many GH4 shots need  appropriate lighting when shooting and some texture in post. He knew about the Noam Kroll settings and told me, they are quite nice and usable out of the box. In his eyes (depending on lighting or contrast), they are better than V-Log because of much easier to work with when expecting pleasant, balanced results in colours."

He told me, OK the GH4 is far away from a pro Cine camera, but it a phantastic allround camera. He doesn't see as many problems with colour grade, but more with a "too perfect" texture of images and the complete lack of motion cadence. When talking about motion cadence, he adviced me - independently from which DSLR I use - to experiment  with different rates of fps. With some cameras, this could work quite well to get a kind of "motion cadence" in the shots.

@jonpais

Motion cadence: That's probably one of the reasons, your Pana shots look so "filmic" - there is not much motion in your examples and that's why we (the audience) percieve the footage as filmic...it could be the feeling of a great motion cadence in these "chilled" shots...They look somehow like "slow motion"...
Another reason could be the asiatic skin tones matching much more better the Pana colour science than shots with "pale europeans"....

Link to post
Share on other sites

I forgot something very important he adviced me too..."When filming motion, try to move!" he told me (moving the camera). If the subject walks away from the camera, try to move in same direction or change the bearing and move towards the subject. This would affect considerably the motion cadence feeling of the audience in lack of a "epic cinema camera" with a "native motion cadence feeling".
I tried this and sometimes it works...I think, this could work even better with a much more experienced camera man than me behind the lens...

@marcuswolschon

You are completely right...what he meant was "normal guys" will never get the experience. He (and many other pro colorists) work minimum 10 hours per day on coloring / grading / correcting. Because of this, they can handle many color profiles of different cameras in a kind of way that small film production companies or one man bands will never get...Even when experimenting the next years...It's a big difference between coloring 50 hours a week or 5...When looking at pro work, 99 percent of web films appear like a wannabe "coloring joke"...

There is a difference between a pro surgeon working 10 hours a day professionally in his job and a butcher, doing sometimes things he calls "surgery". It's not surgery, it's massacre... ;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Arikhan said:


@jonpais

Motion cadence: That's probably one of the reasons, your Pana shots look so "filmic" - there is not much motion in your examples and that's why we (the audience) percieve the footage as filmic...it could be the feeling of a great motion cadence in these "chilled" shots...They look somehow like "slow motion"...

Somewhat off-topic. I grew up with film, shot in Super 8 since I was 8, a pun I was aware of at my birthday, life-determing, my Rosebud. I shot 16mm B&W and developed the footage myself. I was a projectionist for many years, it's like my pulse is tuned to 24p ... - but I never understood what is meant by motion cadence (not a language issue, in german it's Kadenz). But I see that there is something special about jonpais' shots. I think you partly nailed it down by "chilled" and "slow motion".

16 hours ago, Arikhan said:

@Axel
Another reason could be the asiatic skin tones matching much more better the Pana colour science than shots with "pale europeans"....

;-)))

Or that asians generally radiate more patience than Europeans or Americans. And that jonpais reacted to that in his static tripod shots. He observes patiently.

16 hours ago, Arikhan said:

I forgot something very important he adviced me too..."When filming motion, try to move!" he told me (moving the camera). If the subject walks away from the camera, try to move in same direction or change the bearing and move towards the subject. This would affect considerably the motion cadence feeling of the audience in lack of a "epic cinema camera" with a "native motion cadence feeling".

 Too cryptic. I quote my favorite director, who put it more simply: If I know WHAT I'm shooting, I know HOW to shoot it. jonpais portraits people, they are his subject. If I shoot action, the natural impulse is to follow it, "track" it.

15 hours ago, jonpais said:

I should add that the reason I never used the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 is that no matter what I tried, I couldn't hold it steady with the GH4. Now that I've got the G85, it's ready for prime time. :) 

On-topic again: what is all this stuff about in-camera-stabilization, Dual-IS and so forth? Yes, I understand that with the FoV of a 50mm on MFT it's more difficult to shoot handheld. But then, these techniques didn't exist before and people managed to hold their cameras steadily nonetheless. It's a matter of an ergonomic rig and training. No?

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Axel said:

On-topic again: what is all this stuff about in-camera-stabilization, Dual-IS and so forth? Yes, I understand that with the FoV of a 50mm on MFT it's more difficult to shoot handheld. But then, these techniques didn't exist before and people managed to hold their cameras steadily nonetheless. It's a matter of an ergonomic rig and training. No?

It's a problem that only came up when cameras got smaller and lighter.

They don't have a lot of inertia anymore and thus require an active effort to be keps steady,

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...