GH5 2k/FHD 200mbps All-i maybe the best format?

gumonstro

gumonstro

Well-known member
Hi.

First of all, besides resolution, is GH5/5s 2k/FHD 200mbps All-i the same quality as 4k 400mbps All-i?

Second, what is the minimum SD card spec that would support 2k/FHD 200mbps All-i?

If the first answer is YES and the second answer means much cheaper cards, isn't the 2K/FHD 200mbps All-i underrated when we all know that there's not huuuge difference between 2K and 4K?

Best.
 
4K is 4 times the resolution of 2K, however you do not need to have a 4 time higher bitrate as codecs tend to scale positively with higher resolutions (this is especially true for H.265).

I disagree with your finding there is not a huge difference between 2K and 4K.
I find that recording in 4K and having a 4K workflow is vastly superior to recording in 2K.
 
Vastly superior. Good point. Let’s take 2 examples. Sony a6500 shooting HD is vastly inferior to its 4K version (not sharp, less dynamic range). Sony fs700 + SDI OUT + Odyssey 7Q recording Prores 4K vs Prores HD IMO is almost the same thing. GH5/5s HD 200 all-i version behaves like a6500 or FS700 + O7q?
 
Look if you prefer to record 2K with the GH5s then go for it but you only record a quarter of the available resolution that that camera can record. :)
 
Sure, but when your shooting a small budget project that will create a huge amount of data, cards cost almost 400 bucks, then I think resolution is overrated. I’m more into color science and dynamic range. The question is: are they the same? Is 200Mbps All-i a 4K crappy version as with a6500?
 
gumonstro said:
Vastly superior. Good point. Let’s take 2 examples. Sony a6500 shooting HD is vastly inferior to its 4K version (not sharp, less dynamic range). Sony fs700 + SDI OUT + Odyssey 7Q recording Prores 4K vs Prores HD IMO is almost the same thing. GH5/5s HD 200 all-i version behaves like a6500 or FS700 + O7q?
Click to expand...

The a6300/a6500 do indeed have terrible HD, but the problem is (in this particular mirrorless/DSLR case) is that I think (IMO) most of these type of cameras provide the best results at their highest resolutions and aren't exactly designed to super-sample an amazing lower-resolution image like the FS700 via the 7Q (for example).

It might seem the same, but there's a difference...people shoot 2K on an ALEXA but it's coming from a 3K-ish sensor and the camera is probably doing some amazing things inside to produce that super solid 2K image.

It's not an apples to apples comparison with the GH5/S' 2K. Your best images (motion pictures) will no doubt come from shooting 4K with one of those cameras.

Unfortunately I don't know how good the 2K is or isn't, but the Panasonic mirrorless' seem to have better HD than the Canons and Sonys.

EDIT - P.S. What you're basically asking about and I'm describing is what Canon DSLR shooters have been "suffering" with for years, haha...pixel-binned and line-skipped High-Definition (whatever it is)...but the 4K is of course beautiful.
 
Last edited:
I've been using FHD 200mbps frequently the past few months as part of my camera package for a TV series. It has held up exceptionally well. It's being worked with in post along side my footage from the C300 Mark II (12-bit 444) and people have commented how similar the footage ends up looking after a minimal amount of correction.
 
spgreen65 said:
isn't 2k 2160, and FHD 1080p?
Click to expand...

FHD - 1920 x 1080
2K - 2048 × 1080
UHD - 3840 x 2160
4K - 4096 x 2160

Those are the main numbers, but there may be other differences (options) to them when shooting with certain cinema cameras.
 
gumonstro said:
Sure, but when your shooting a small budget project that will create a huge amount of data, cards cost almost 400 bucks, then I think resolution is overrated. I’m more into color science and dynamic range. The question is: are they the same? Is 200Mbps All-i a 4K crappy version as with a6500?
Click to expand...
If storage is a concern shoot long GOP and transcode to all-intra afterwards.
 
Do you think re scaling in camera is going to be as good as re scaling on a workstation? I shoot and edit in UHD for delivery in 1080 and consider the GH5 to be an exceptionally good camera for 1080 output as long as you capture in UHD. If you capture in 1080/2k I reckon it would be good for 720p delivery......
 
It's probably now more common to use post and edit and deliver in 4K (even though many are still shooting 4K-6K-8K and delivering in 2K), but cameras years ago were built with the process taking placed inside the hardware.

The F35 (and its other models) - considered one of the best HD cameras on the planet - is delivering its beautiful 1080p from a 5K sensor.

Blackmagic cameras (with 4K sensors) have amazing super-sampled 1080p. I hear the REDs are good with HD (no experience shooting anything but 4K on the newer ones). Ofcourse the industry's favorite is on the list.

But even now...this notion is even becoming a selling point for mirrorless cameras like the Sonys, which clearly make it known their 4K is coming off a 5K or 6K sensor (a6300, a6500, a7rIII, a7III, maybe a9 and more).
 
I just read this thread: http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?355001-FHD-and-4K-downsampled-from-6K-sensor-Slo-Mo-too

It says that both GH5's 4k and 2k are downsampled from its 6k (or 5.2k) sensor. On GH4, the 2k (or HD, doesn't matter) ALL-i is a different process and inferior compared to GH5's 2k.

So, for what is discussed on the thread mentioned above, both 4k 400 All-i and 2k 200 All-i come from a downsampled 6k (or 5.2k) sensor.

So, if

A- Cards that can shoot 4k 400 All-i are almost 400 bucks
B- You need a fast (and expensive) computer to run those 4k files
C- You'll need more storage
D- There's the Steve Yedlin factor: https://ascmag.com/articles/a-clear-look-at-the-issue-of-resolution)

Then isn't 2k 200 all-i underrated?

BTW, is anyone 100% sure that the GH5's 2K and 4K, besides resolution, results in identical footage?
 
Last edited:
Not entirely sure, but I think there are two things being discussed in that thread; super-sampling and sensor crop. You might want to confirm with someone from Panasonic.

Nevertheless, is it possible for you to rent the camera and test them side-by-side?

Only you will know best if you like what you see?
 
NorBro said:
Not entirely sure, but I think there are two things being discussed in that thread; super-sampling and sensor crop. You might want to confirm with someone from Panasonic.

Nevertheless, is it possible for you to rent the camera and test them side-by-side?

Only you will know best if you like what you see?
Click to expand...

All I know is the GH5's 1080 image regardless of being All-I or IPB is amazing. I can't see any difference between the GH5's 1080 and its 4k on an HD monitor. Of course if you punch in there is a difference but otherwise I don't see anything.
 
In resolution terms the GH5 is not a true 4k camera in terms of broadcast specs so it's not surprising the 2k and 4k footage looks so close.
 
gumonstro said:
I just read this thread: http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?355001-FHD-and-4K-downsampled-from-6K-sensor-Slo-Mo-too

It says that both GH5's 4k and 2k are downsampled from its 6k (or 5.2k) sensor. On GH4, the 2k (or HD, doesn't matter) ALL-i is a different process and inferior compared to GH5's 2k.

So, for what is discussed on the thread mentioned above, both 4k 400 All-i and 2k 200 All-i come from a downsampled 6k (or 5.2k) sensor.

So, if

A- Cards that can shoot 4k 400 All-i are almost 400 bucks
B- You need a fast (and expensive) computer to run those 4k files
C- You'll need more storage
D- There's the Steve Yedlin factor: https://ascmag.com/articles/a-clear-look-at-the-issue-of-resolution)

Then isn't 2k 200 all-i underrated?

BTW, is anyone 100% sure that the GH5's 2K and 4K, besides resolution, results in identical footage?
Click to expand...

No. Can’t be identical if the resolution is different. Resolution also affects how the h264 encodes each frame. There is also how that 6k sensor is scaled to HD vs 4k. Scaling of images is a dest uctive procss that results in a new image mathematically created. How that math is performed could be different between 4k and HD and even if it is the same scaling the same 6k sensor by two different factors will always result in a different look for each. Only way to get the true identical look is to shoot 4k and Hd with a cropped ETC type mode because you are taking a 1:1 crop of the sensor meaning no extra scaling or image processing.

If you are asking is the results professional looking then the answer is absolutely. 200mbps all-I is higher than what ProRes HQ uses for 24p so it should look pretty darn amazing. 400mbps allI for 4k is a bit low for other all-i formats but higher resolution doesn’t always need the same increase it datarate. It’s really scientifically impossible to know which is better without actually looking at them and seeing how well. They hold up for what you shoot.

If you ar only delivering HD and plan on doing so for many years then there is nothing wrong with shooting HD 200mbps in camera. 4k only really matters if you must deliver in 4k. Of course 4k looks more detailed, that’s the entire point of it. That detail only matters however if you actually view it on a 4k display. Recording HD from the 6k sensor or shooting 4k and down converting in post to HD doesn’t really yield any extra detail other than a pseudo 4:4:4 color space. You only really need that however if you really need every single pix l to have accurate color. There’s a reason why all HD broadcast professional codecs record to 4:2:2 and it is the professional standard.

So if HD is your intended workflow there is absolutely nothing wrong with recording 200mbps in camera. It’s an extremely robust and professional standards way to go. Only use 4k if you are sure you need the 4k. A lot of big budget Hollywood Movies are still mastered in 2k so there is nothing wrong with it outside of pixel peeping. At least when the Hd is handled correctly which the Gh5 does.
 
Here is a direct comparison of GH5 2K & 4K raw All-I footage to Alexa Classic ProRes (2k Olpf gold standard), with cameras moved to compensate for crop factor:

RAW

Stills Only

The GH5 2K is significantly sharper, here are updated DaVinci Resolve single-node settings to simulate the Alexa OLPF:

unnamed.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top