Jump to content
Andrew Reid

Panasonic GH5 - all is revealed!

Recommended Posts

28 minutes ago, Nodnarb said:

Your autofocus test were helpful, but they were a little different from Max's weren't they? He was using the 12-35 2.8, and he did a significant amount of indoor testing with his assistant walking toward and away from the camera. I could have missed it if you did the same test, this thread is 86 pages long already.

No, absolutely, not, they weren't 'very different' from Max's test for the portion that I did. I did 2 tests that mirrored 2 of his tests (the outdoor test and the 'lens in front of the camera' test. Both of my tests were 100% successful and 100% repeatable and both of his were utter failures. How can you possibly ignore this even if I didn't conduct every single test he did? I never contended that I duplicated every test he did. And I also made it clear I was using the 14-140 lens. I won't go out and buy the lens he used so I can duplicate that aspect too. Folks will ignore those results too if it doesn't fit their preconceived notions. 

I did do an indoor test in a dark house during a stormy day that I posted. Granted I didn't have a subject moving toward and away from me, but I did walk through the house seeing if the CAF would focus as I walked. It did.

FWIW, I don't believe the 14-140 lens is astronomically better than the 12-35 for AF. It would take that astronomical difference in lenses to explain my results vs his. Much easier to believe a defective camera or something else. 

Now I'm not saying this is you, but as I've seen for many years, when a new piece of equipment is introduced (and this could be cameras, TVs, audio equipment etc.), there are many that try to denigrate that equipment because they don't want to invest in new equipment and have a need to defend what they own. It's human nature for many of us.

40 minutes ago, Nodnarb said:

Even after dialing in settings that he said worked "quite well", the camera still loses focus almost 10 times in less than a minute and a half (12:17-13:30). And this was while conveniently using an external recorder not recording internally, after Max found that the GH5 autofocus worked much better when not recording internally. Joseph now says in the comments he didn't realize this and that he wasn't trying to deceive viewers. So he bashes reviewers like Max for supposedly not taking the time to understand the camera, at the same time that he supposedly doesn't know as much as Max about the camera.

Actually he never 'bashed' Max. That's a bit of hyperbole. What he did poke fun at, justifiably IMO, was one of Max's favorite tests, having his subject pop up from below and disappear. Personally I think it's a silly test that's representative of nothing in real shooting.

The reason he used an external recorder was to prove where his settings were so that we could all see them while he was recording, something that was missing from Max's video. I personally thought it was a nice touch. To be perfectly honest, I too was unaware until I watched that video that there was an AF performance difference between internal & external recording. I'd bet most owners are unaware of that.

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
30 minutes ago, wolf33d said:

What are you talking about? There is no car in his video, he his filming his face moving forward and away from the camera, so this has nothing to do with your video of the car. Again, I am talking about this video from 12:50. No car, just filming his face. And we can see the AF is awful. Since then he posted a comparison of his face tracking with the A6500 and as you can see it does a 10000000 times better job. 

Now the fact that you say focus tracking does not work, you must have never used a Canon DPAF enabled camera, or the A6500, or do not know how to use them properly. 

 

Really, then what is this at 18:00? THAT is what I duplicated. Notice his failure? Notice my success in the same type of video? I give up. Why not watch the video that others are talking about. You are so far behind what's been discussed. I've reached the point where I don't give a damn about Max's tests since they are NOT representative of what many owners are experiencing. Good grief, if there were 10,000 GH5 videos with perfect focus, you'd hang your hat on this one. You don't like the GH5, don't buy it! Done.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@jonpais, I'm sorry pal but I see the thing upside down and I'm afraid we will only be going to merry-go-round on this one here.

First off and I beg your apologize for my tone here now but that's coming by default LOL : ) from my law school background (before film school on par with camera work for more than two decades and a half now):

1) Where are the facts you may name Imaging Resource as an unreliable site? Because of "sugar-coated reviews", as you say? Listen, I am not even placing in doubt the fairness or not of your judgement on them, just wondering.

2) There were finest samples on their (Panasonic) method of applying NR techniques, very controversial approach BTW. To my book, a crime against IQ, posterior usage and so on. Without mention the most part here seemed to concur; you included I believe, from your posts there.

3) Ah, but the sensor performance (and some cooking) is so good that we've been concluding that mercenary method (I guess we can call it like that) won't play a major role in the further combination after all (so, the proof is in the pudding, once again, my first motto throughout all my posting along the last decade in these and other boards, mainly dvxuser and reduser).

4) Moreover, the thread was all about samples from stills not video frames as very early stated as disclaimer. 

5) My thread was produced during the pre-production period -- no camera available, but the samples were ; ) motivating high concern from my side on the methodology applied (as thread's subject), so presented as a worry, presage, warning, a (bad) sign, foreshadow, threat... so, something that could/can even be corrected if they would be reading (I'm afraid not, though) such lines.

6) The detractors of GH5 AF have been coming to successively post a few disinformation based on their production (!) units because they simply have no clue how to overcome eventual limitations of the system, they don't even care how to properly use it in order to extend all the potentiality of features like touch to focus, as for instance.

7) We do mention here of professional reviewing, that is, the reviewers are paid by affiliate sales, so I guess that's a consensual statement which automatically implies some responsibilities associated -- as craft, for the crafts and professionals targeted, for the brand(s) with its (their) name and interests involved; and, of course, susceptible (both sides, not only the manufacturers) to public criticism, mainly by the readers and in behalf of the facts.

8) They're hurting GH5 sales from their unskilled perspective.

 

You are an intelligent mod here, so it is your duty to not feed up this mistake as much as mine proud to be a serious player to post good news from low light performance whenever this camera is able to. Once more, that's what the historic of my posting in that thread fairly concurs.

 

E :-)

Share this post


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

Yes Ken...I tend to agree....and the weird thing is that a couple of negative GH5 threads have already been opened by the AF crowd...but as they don't get enough traffic I guess, they've now spilled over into the thread that was intended for people who actually want this camera...are excited to learn about and discuss it...perhaps time for a separate"only people who are excited about the GH5 and DON'T CARE about AF" thread....where those who've waited patiently since  2014! (me) can enjoy discussing and sharing in things re this camera instead of defending yet another level of outstanding features in the newest GH release.

 

PS: Things must be way too quiet in the canon or sony threads...all those owners seem to be over here!

Fritz, superb idea!!! This is done on other forums to keep the trolls out. I like it! :)

34 minutes ago, Orangenz said:

I tried it your way (one area) and the AF is fast as. So that's it guys, use ONE AREA AF.

Orangenz, it's amazing isn't? I watch these guys adjusting speed to +5 and responsiveness to -5 and then 20 settings in-between to achieve the 'perfect balance', and all I did was use central area focusing at the default settings. Done. I think some guys are making this more complicated than it needs to be in many instances. Sure, it might not be perfect for every situation, but hell, I've used it in a variety of environments and it's worked every time. :) 

Share this post


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

Fritz, superb idea!!! This is done on other forums to keep the trolls out. I like it! :)

Orangenz, it's amazing isn't? I watch these guys adjusting to +5 on speed and -5 on responsiveness and then 20 settings in-between to achieve the 'perfect balance', and all I did was use central area focusing at the default settings. Done. Sure, it might not be perfect for every situation, but hell, I've used it in a variety of environments and it's worked every time. :) 

Yeah, Ken. You're right! At this point of the route, trolling is the fair word to call it ;-)

Share this post


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

Yeah, Ken. You're right! At this point of the route, trolling is the fair word to call it ;-)

You've been posting some rather impressive pics from the gh5, nice work! Can't really follow your comments here, lost in translation a tad :D 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Orangenz said:

You've been posting some rather impressive pics from the gh5, nice work! Can't really follow your comments here, lost in translation a tad :D 

LOL Sorry mate, I only try my best to break down that can be deconstructed into harmless information in a different way round the ring ;-) 

Share this post


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

Really, then what is this at 18:00? THAT is what I duplicated. Notice his failure? Notice my success in the same type of video? I give up. Why not watch the video that others are talking about. You are so far behind what's been discussed. I've reached the point where I don't give a damn about Max's tests since they are NOT representative of what many owners are experiencing. Good grief, if there were 10,000 GH5 videos with perfect focus, you'd hang your hat on this one. You don't like the GH5, don't buy it! Done.

 

I clearly stated the 12:50 mark in my initial message to which you reacted, not the 18:00. 

Maybe his  GH5 is defective maybe not, however you did not replicate his face test which interest me a LOT more than the car test.
Anyway I am receiving my GH5 soon and will be able to check that by myself. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exaustive testing means too little when the task is not peanuts and people tend to expect it like that or are unable to go beyond. Life is not easy. Not even when we're used to take it accordingly. Enough is not always enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is great fun!

Does anybody's friends / family / wives / boyfriends tell them they're probably a little bit crazy for getting the popcorn out while eagerly awaiting the next instalment in the GH5 autofocus YouTube saga.

So, PhotoJoseph is maybe going to visit Max and possibly stay over. And Peter Gregg''s dog is called Jingles and he doesn't like cleaning the kitchen but he really likes Christmas. I mean, I didn't even know who these people were yesterday!

Share this post


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

This is great fun!

Does anybody's friends / family / wives / boyfriends tell them they're probably a little bit crazy for getting the popcorn out while eagerly awaiting the next instalment in the GH5 autofocus YouTube saga.

So, PhotoJoseph is maybe going to visit Max and possibly stay over. And Peter Gregg''s dog is called Jingles and he doesn't like cleaning the kitchen but he really likes Christmas. I mean, I didn't even know who these people were yesterday!

I truly hope Max doesn't pay for Joseph's travel expenses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, dbp said:

Man, I must say, a few years ago I would have never guessed that auto focus of all things would be such a heated debate topic on these forums!

LOL Quote of the thread! :-)

47 minutes ago, jonpais said:

I truly hope Max doesn't pay for Joseph's travel expenses.

I am sorry man, but I am lost on your concern about his business. His popularity is not going down, on the contrary...

Share this post


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

You are now officially on my 'ignore' list.

Oh by my goodness, what did I write you had disliked? (I've just done a little edit up there)

That's non sense. We need to be able to stand any discussion when polite. I won't second you, though. I'll still be able to follow and like your posts when you make it happen. I'll miss your usual likes anyway. Pity you're unable to be reciprocal for such matter ;-)

 

YT mediocrity rules over our heads.

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...