Jump to content

GH5 vs Ursa Mini 4.6K


Recommended Posts

I was planning on doing a more in depth test, but I only had a few minutes to spare during a shoot to compare the two cameras with our actress.

GH5 Settings: UHD, V Log L 10 bit, ISO 800, 24p, Sigma 18-35, shot at 28mm f4 using Nikon Speedbooster.

Ursa Mini 4.6K Settings: UHD, ProRes 422, ISO 800, 24p, Sigma 18-35, shot at 28mm f4.

Grade: I started with Comet Color A Side for the UM46K. Added a bit of contrast and saturation. From that point I tried matching the GH5's color/exposure to match.

Lighting was mixed conditions. Her face was lit with a Quasar Science 5600K LED tube + natural daylight coming in the window. Background lights were running at around 2600K. Walls are a greenish yellow color naturally.

 

password: test

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 163
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I was planning on doing a more in depth test, but I only had a few minutes to spare during a shoot to compare the two cameras with our actress. GH5 Settings: UHD, V Log L 10 bit, ISO 800, 24p, Si

The reason there is so much amazing footage and shitty footage from the GH5 is because it is an amazing but cheap camera.   Thus you have both skilled and total n00bs using it! Remember it i

Well I guess there is a time to just embrace that this is 2017, not 1950. The Digital look is here to stay like it or not. 4k is in, 720 is out. I think as a hobbyist I would love to keep the film loo

Posted Images

9 minutes ago, AaronChicago said:

I was planning on doing a more in depth test, but I only had a few minutes to spare during a shoot to compare the two cameras with our actress.

GH5 Settings: UHD, V Log L 10 bit, ISO 800, 24p, Sigma 18-35, shot at 28mm f4 using Nikon Speedbooster.

Ursa Mini 4.6K Settings: UHD, ProRes 422, ISO 800, 24p, Sigma 18-35, shot at 28mm f4.

Grade: I started with Comet Color A Side for the UM46K. Added a bit of contrast and saturation. From that point I tried matching the GH5's color/exposure to match.

Lighting was mixed conditions. Her face was lit with a Quasar Science 5600K LED tube + natural daylight coming in the window. Background lights were running at around 2600K. Walls are a greenish yellow color naturally.

 

password: test

Yeah the GH5 is a little Too brutal on a woman's face. I am sure it could be "turned down". But colors wise not a lot different I see. GH5 for the money is looking hard to beat.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair, most camera will do a ok job in controlled environment, but if you go shoot in uncontrolled mixed light environment, or outside in high contrast situation, the gh5 will fall apart compared to the ursa 4.6k. That what you pay for.
Also the motion is not even comparable, it s just ugly on Gh cameras, it s fine if you do documentary/corporate work but for fiction or music video the aesthetic is not very appropriate .

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, seems the GH5 is still struggling with yellow/orange/green, which it always seems to exaggerate, especially at somewhat higher ISOs. The BM is much less biased... a whole lot smoother in the tones. Still though, not a bad job by the GH5. With very slight corrections you can beautify that shot quite easily. Skintones on Panasonics have come quite the way, I must say though, quite the improvement there.

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Laurier said:

Also the motion is not even comparable, it s just ugly on Gh cameras, it s fine if you do documentary/corporate work but for fiction or music video the aesthetic is not very appropriate .

Yep they need to disable the temporal noise reduction. Even though it generally looks alright there are cases that it creates strange artifacts (and no his leg was not wiggling around :) , EDIT but now that I think about it might might be due to shooting at higher frame-rate and then exporting at 24p but there are other examples as well) : 

590771ac60b84_ScreenShot2017-05-01at12_33_19PM.png.985a06741ae35e13a80a75cae37513e1.png

from

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The highlights are definitely a huge win for the UM46K. @Cinegain you're right about the yellow/orange. I made it a point to not key out sections for adjustments. If I were to key I would fix those 2 warm lights in the back to be less green/yellow. Her face stays pretty neutral which is good. Overall I really like the GH5 though. I imagine it will even get better with the bitrate increase at 10 bit.

I should be able to upload the raw footage later if you guys want to test it out for yourself.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup. Exactly. I already have an additional V-Log L code in, but decided to give my current gear a little longer run for their money until: the 400Mbps etc firmware is there, they offer the 12-35mm f/2.8 II as kit which should save a bit of casheroos and well, there's that mystery camera... so, I'll play the waiting game for now. I guess the GX80 will still be a keeper, especially with that Leica 15mm f/1.7, but I think it will soon be time to give the G7, GH4 & G80 up for adaption and switch to the GH5.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice test but I wonder why people dont want to put both cameras into their best modes when making comparisons? There are some of them on YT and there is always GH5 very best mode (4k 10bit) vs very mediocre Ursa prores. I think the biggest selling point of UM is to have compressed raw. People compares dynamic range of both cameras but always vs Ursas prores. Why? Where is raw shadow/highlight recovery ability? That makes a lot of difference. It is like comparing volkswagen golf 1.4 vs golf R but R is allowed to only use 1st and 2nd gear and ECO shit setting. The same about low light - yeah, i know that UM46k is no very great in this area but you have no NR in camera at all. Does GH5 can disable internal NR completely? I doubt it. Thats why UM comes with free full version of resolve and its great NR built into the app. So to be fair low light tests shoud be make with some of NR applied when it is test vs GH4, Gh5 etc...

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Don Kotlos said:

Yep they need to disable the temporal noise reduction. Even though it generally looks alright there are cases that it creates strange artifacts (and no his leg was not wiggling around :) , EDIT but now that I think about it might might be due to shooting at higher frame-rate and then exporting at 24p but there are other examples as well) : 

590771ac60b84_ScreenShot2017-05-01at12_33_19PM.png.985a06741ae35e13a80a75cae37513e1.png

 

 

 

 

They shot this on Firmware 1.0. Last firmware is supposed to switch temporal noise reduction off in VLOG.

 

 

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

unrelated - but the first two pieces on your vimeo are gorgeous - is that the ursa mini?

 

and what are you using for lenses and grading?

really impressive stuff Aaron!  i was just in chicago like 4 times this year - we should meet up!

Thanks man! Yeah let's hang next time you're in town.

Re: lenses. My go to clean look lenses are Xeen 24 and 50mm. Used them on the Vesperteen video. Other than that I use the Sigma 18-35, and Tokina 28-70 f2.6.

Grading I just use Premiere Lumetri. I started using Kholi's Comet Color LUT for the 4.6K. I always add some blue to the highlights, and desaturate green.

2 hours ago, Dimitris Stasinos said:

Thanks for the test Aaron! Regarding gh5 (and previous gh*) motion issues, have you guys encountered the source of this problem? Is it NR as Don Kotos stated? Maybe a codec related issue? Is it possible that with the 400 mbps All-I will this get solved? 

I haven't yet, but don't pixel peep to the extreme. It might be in some footage and I didn't notice.

3 hours ago, kgv5 said:

Nice test but I wonder why people dont want to put both cameras into their best modes when making comparisons? There are some of them on YT and there is always GH5 very best mode (4k 10bit) vs very mediocre Ursa prores. I think the biggest selling point of UM is to have compressed raw. People compares dynamic range of both cameras but always vs Ursas prores. Why? Where is raw shadow/highlight recovery ability? That makes a lot of difference. It is like comparing volkswagen golf 1.4 vs golf R but R is allowed to only use 1st and 2nd gear and ECO shit setting. The same about low light - yeah, i know that UM46k is no very great in this area but you have no NR in camera at all. Does GH5 can disable internal NR completely? I doubt it. Thats why UM comes with free full version of resolve and its great NR built into the app. So to be fair low light tests shoud be make with some of NR applied when it is test vs GH4, Gh5 etc...

Well my test wasn't to prove that the UM46K is the superior camera. I think everyone knows it has a better image. I was just testing how myself and alot of people shoot with ProRes instead of Raw. I never use Raw. In fact I rarely shoot 4K on the Ursa. Mostly 2K ProRes 4444.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Ed_David said:

Really impressive stuff Aaron!  i was just in chicago like 4 times this year - we should meet up!

Same, @AaronChicago! Based out of Milwaukee, but I'm in Chicago all the time. If you ever need a hand or want to do lunch, let me know!

As for the video, the Ursa is obviously a step above the GH5(as expected), but I could get the two to match reasonably well in situations where I needed the GH5's smaller size/weight. Very much appreciate the test!

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, TheRenaissanceMan said:

Same, @AaronChicago! Based out of Milwaukee, but I'm in Chicago all the time. If you ever need a hand or want to do lunch, let me know!

As for the video, the Ursa is obviously a step above the GH5(as expected), but I could get the two to match reasonably well in situations where I needed the GH5's smaller size/weight. Very much appreciate the test!

Yeah man, let me know when you're in town!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I guess the biggest question is to me, maybe others, is which camera actually looked more like her live AaronChicago??  I can always change a camera to look different, but not always realistic looking, that is harder to do if that is what you want, say in a corporate interview, which I understand, I guess, this wasn't the case here...

 I guess what I mean is I would Not use a BMPCC to interview the CEO of General Motors over the GH5. Who, by the way, is a Woman. You are allowed to turn sharpness down a bit on the GH5!  :grin:

Seems to me people are beating up on a camera that has only been out a month, and maybe they only had for a week or less. Is it a 2000 dollar Arri, well no, but It can shoot 4k where a Arri can't, and with the firmware updates coming I bet you could shoot a film, and Netflix would take it, according to their requirements. Can't do that even with a Arri Alexa. It Has to be 4k. I think it has great potential. Luke seems to have figured it out.

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...