Jump to content
Andrew Reid

Panasonic GH5 - all is revealed!

Recommended Posts

I wouldn't want an f0.5. It'd hardly have sufficient resolution for 4k, at least not with MFT sensors (because the size of the pixels crammed onto such a tiny sensor means the circle of confusion also needs to be smaller - good luck with finding a lens for 8k on MFT!). The better way is speedboosting. You mentioned Barry Lyndon. Did you read about their difficulties to focus? Did you see the BD? The image is actually too soft for HD, this would never work with UHD.

BTW: does nobody have problems with the PDF-link above? Preview says the file is damaged. PDF reader won't open it:

GH5%20PDF.jpg

Is this a Mac issue? 

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
11 minutes ago, Axel said:

XAVC is such a good codec, it doesn't need 10-bit desperately. Do you really think that the 10-bit of the GH5 is automatically better? I don't see any evidence for this so far. What I expect is a camera that just has so many good features that it will be a joy to shoot video with it.

Well maybe it is not that much better, but Sony will up the game, and that means more than just one little item. Sony tends to go for the throat as of late.

For battery problems if you are on a Tripod there is a ton of solutions for longer battery usage. Even the Battery grip goes for a pretty good while. 2 hours on average record time in 4k.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't see Sony giving the A7xIII's 10-bit internal. They didn't even give the II's 10-bit HDMI, after the GH4 had been out for quite a while with it. I think 10-bit HDMI is the most they'll do, and even that is a stretch. They have pro cams to protect, and still being the only FF mirrorless is still more than enough of a headline feature to sell on.

Personally I would rather see the III's stay 8-bit but fix all the dumb nitpicks, than go 10-bit but still overheat, have awful battery life, dim non-touchscreens, worst possible rolling shutter, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, aldolega said:

I can't see Sony giving the A7xIII's 10-bit internal. They didn't even give the II's 10-bit HDMI, after the GH4 had been out for quite a while with it. I think 10-bit HDMI is the most they'll do, and even that is a stretch. They have pro cams to protect, and still being the only FF mirrorless is still more than enough of a headline feature to sell on.

Personally I would rather see the III's stay 8-bit but fix all the dumb nitpicks, than go 10-bit but still overheat, have awful battery life, dim non-touchscreens, etc.

Well they will probably make the body a bit bigger, the GH5 is quite a bit bigger than the GH4 is. Yeah hard to say what Sony is thinking but they sell one hell of a lot more A7's  than they do high end stuff. All these Bigger Video camera makers are going to have to decide do they sell 5,000 high end ones, or 200,000 low end ones. I would take the latter route!

Share this post


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

Well you and I know the next Sony A7s, A7r will Have to have 10 bit and a few more items that the GH5 has to stay competitive. So maybe for a little more money over the GH5 the A7's will be the thing to have. The low light, better DR, and even the ability for better DoF is hard to pass up for a few more dollars.

I think the reason people are asking for 10 bit in the next A7 series is just because Pana gave it In GH5. It is the "take that" factor of the prosumer market. That doesn't necessarily means that A7S need absolutely 10 bit to be a fine all around camera. No one asked for it before gh5's announcement. But people asked for other thinks, like better economics, usable screen and better autofocus for gimbal work. As Axel said XAVC codec is badass and the only reason for a prosumer camera to have 10 bit codec is to have room in post for correcting color issues. You can easily correct the "zombie" effect on the skin tones that a7 series give in post, but good luck with orange flat skin tones of a g7 ( this is exactly where a 10 bit codec shines). Overall I think that in this specific market it is wiser to provide a nice 8bit codec with pleasing skin tones than a 10 bit codec to save your camera's bad rendition of color. How many of the Pana fanboys out there have actually tried to work on a 10bit file really? I wouldn't be so excited, especially after trying to work with Luke's files on an IMac.....(dude THANKS for these...). Don't get me wrong, I am really considering gh5, but dear Pana...fix those colors please, cause everything else is perfect....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well sad to say video bits is the new MP race. Not that many people are savoy on Video Speak. But it is now, it is in the forefront on all the web with the GH5 ads. Canon has stayed with 8 bit even on the newer C100 series cameras also. So I see your point, but there has been a lot of bad press on slog 3 falling apart on the A7s because it is Only 8bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dimitris Stasinos said:

No one asked for it before gh5's announcement.

Oh plenty did ;) 

3 minutes ago, Dimitris Stasinos said:

As Axel said XAVC codec is badass and the only reason for a prosumer camera to have 10 bit codec is to have room in post for correcting color issues. 

Well, they should at least add 10bit output for those who need it, cause slog2/3 with 8bits/channel sucks. 

Share this post


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

XAVC codec ...You can easily correct the "zombie" effect on the skin tones that a7 series give in post, but good luck with orange flat skin tones of a g7 ( this is exactly where a 10 bit codec shines).

You know the truism it's not the camera. I add another: it's not the codec. The colors of my old 7D were gorgeous, and they could be color corrected (in the happy days when I just color corrected and not dabbled at grading) without falling apart with a very primitive H.264 codec.

And you are right, it's easy to make the Sony colors look acceptable. It's impossible (in 8-bit) to make them really good. Will GH5's 10-bit allow this? I hope so. What I suspect is that they can be corrected to look as acceptable as A7x. Unfortunately the 10-bit footage available so far doesn't focus on skintones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Axel and @jonpais

We were talking yesterday about AF on Pana devices...I had some months ago the dvx200 (GH4 sensor size, cropped 4/3 sensor) in my hands and have talked yesterday to someone using the new Pana HC-X1 (the same sensor and image processing like UX90 and UX180 - all these cameras are 1") for some weeks now. There is something I'm wondering about:

Tapping focus on DVX200, Pana HC-X1, etc. leads to perfect focus transition without any hunting or wobble - same focusing accuracy like on current Sony devices. Trying to do this on current consumer devices (eg GX85, G85, etc.) ends in some cases in focus hunting. I believe, Panasonic could do a better AF on consumer cameras, if they would want to...But apparently they want to offer exact focusing via AF only on their more expensive camcorders...

Take a look at this short demonstration, it corresponds exactly to my experience...

Honny soit qui mal y pense... ;-)

Share this post


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

Oh plenty did ;) 

Well, they should at least add 10bit output for those who need it, cause slog2/3 with 8bits/channel sucks. 

Of course and I am sure they will do this. i consider Sony slog2/3 as "Extreme". Sony has an exaggerated perception of what "flat" means. Slog3 is inarguably an overkill and I don't know if even 10bits are enough. What other companies call flat, Sony calls it standard. It took me over a month to built a "Canon like" ,or "Non zombie" profile on my FS700 and this with extreme settings...Of course 8 bit is not enough for this. I am only playing with cine gammas and have found the sweet spot between DR and codec efficiency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Dimitris Stasinos said:

How many of the Pana fanboys out there have actually tried to work on a 10bit file really?

BMPCC, BMPC and UM4,6k ProRes in log. Apply the official rec_709 LUT, some minor adjustments (CC, not grading) - e voilá! : really, really great skintones, many nuances. This isn't raw, it's ProRes (pre-production footage):

Is it the codec? I don't think so. It's the color science of the camera. I dare say with the 400mbps Intra update the codec will be on par with ProRes. Did you know? ProRes422 is 400mbps @ 2160 25p - and it's a less efficient codec!

Share this post


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

BMPCC, BMPC and UM4,6k ProRes in log. Apply the official rec_709 LUT, some minor adjustments (CC, not grading) - e voilá! : really, really great skintones, many nuances. This isn't raw, it's ProRes (pre-production footage):

Is it the codec? I don't think so. It's the color science of the camera. I dare say with the 400mbps Intra update the codec will be on par with ProRes. Did you know? ProRes422 is 400mbps @ 2160 25p - and it's a less efficient codec!

I am a big fan of BM's image. Indeed, nice colors & DR on that video. I hope we can get something close to this in camera through h264 one day... Will gh5 be that tool after Summer's firmware updates? I wish....400 Mbps h264 is indeed a killer spec.

Share this post


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

BMPCC, BMPC and UM4,6k ProRes in log. Apply the official rec_709 LUT, some minor adjustments (CC, not grading) - e voilá! : really, really great skintones, many nuances. This isn't raw, it's ProRes (pre-production footage):

Is it the codec? I don't think so. It's the color science of the camera. I dare say with the 400mbps Intra update the codec will be on par with ProRes. Did you know? ProRes422 is 400mbps @ 2160 25p - and it's a less efficient codec!

This image does not pop at all. I'm thinking it's not the camera, but lighting. It just seems kind of flat. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Dimitris Stasinos said:

I am a big fan of BM's image. 

Me too. You know what? If the GH5 had these colors and DR, I was willing to pay those ~ 7000-8000 € (an Ursa Mini with shoulder mount, battery, EVF and cards). I don't like the Ursa Mini for it's size and weight, price is secondary here. Since I've sold everything related to MFT long ago, the GH5 would cost me over 4000 € anyway ...

48 minutes ago, Dimitris Stasinos said:

I hope we can get something close to this in camera through h264 one day... 

The right profile, the right settings, a color chart, some post. Then close enough, I'm sure! Can't turn 12 stops into 15 stops of course. You'd have to use some old tricks, bounce the shadows or ND the windows, whatever.

Share this post


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

@Axel and @jonpais

We were talking yesterday about AF on Pana devices...I had some months ago the dvx200 (GH4 sensor size, cropped 4/3 sensor) in my hands and have talked yesterday to someone using the new Pana HC-X1 (the same sensor and image processing like UX90 and UX180 - all these cameras are 1") for some weeks now. There is something I'm wondering about:

Tapping focus on DVX200, Pana HC-X1, etc. leads to perfect focus transition without any hunting or wobble - same focusing accuracy like on current Sony devices. Trying to do this on current consumer devices (eg GX85, G85, etc.) ends in some cases in focus hunting. I believe, Panasonic could do a better AF on consumer cameras, if they would want to...But apparently they want to offer exact focusing via AF only on their more expensive camcorders...

Take a look at this short demonstration, it corresponds exactly to my experience...

Honny soit qui mal y pense... ;-)

 

Well, that's basically the advantage of the lens and focusing system on traditional video cams.

Possibly the only reason, as well as good IS, that lots of us still use them in the field.

No finicky DSLR or mirrorless AF systems to worry about :]

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Eduardo Portas

Is there a technical explanation therefore? Are the fixed lenses on classical cameras/camcorder better "adjusted" for the camera AF system than any "loose lenses" for interchangeble lens cameras (aka DSLR), or is this because of economical consideration of Pana trying to protect their "professional camcorder" product line?

Share this post


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

@Eduardo Portas

Is there a technical explanation therefore? Are the fixed lenses on classical cameras/camcorder better "adjusted" for the camera AF system than any "loose lenses" for interchangeble lens cameras (aka DSLR), or is this because of economical consideration of Pana trying to protect their "professional camcorder" product line?

Yes. I believe it's the combination of a par focal lens and a dedicated zooming mechanism.

Panny has some PZ lenses that you can mount of their mirrorless cameras for a similar effect.

I'm sure other forum members can give us a better reason, though.

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...