joe12south said:
So that is the judgment criteria? JPEG Exif v2.31 8 bit 420 versus Panasonic RW2 Raw? And from that you conclude the same difference results from BMD 12 bit compressed Raw and Panny 400 mbps All-I 422 10 bit? Apples to oranges.
GH5 Game Over, Panasonic
- Thread starter Jim Simon
- Start date
So that is the judgment criteria? JPEG Exif v2.31 8 bit 420 versus Panasonic RW2 Raw? And from that you conclude the same difference results from BMD 12 bit compressed Raw and Panny 400 mbps All-I 422 10 bit? Apples to oranges.
There is talk of a firmware update coming at Photokina for the GH5 and s..
icarusfilm
Veteran
Based on that rumor we can start a thread called "game over Blackmagic"
QUOTE=Matthere;1986766719]There is talk of a firmware update coming at Photokina for the GH5 and s..[/QUOTE]
QUOTE=Matthere;1986766719]There is talk of a firmware update coming at Photokina for the GH5 and s..[/QUOTE]
I was comparing GH5 Raw images to 10 bit video. I find the RAW images have a lot more highlight and shadow information. Of course black magic raw may not be as good.
DPStewart
Veteran
Blackmagic compressed RAW has been out for YEARS on several different cameras. It is mathematically lossless. There's no guessing or wondering at all as it is well established and in use by a huge number of people.
It's 12-bit RAW plain and simple.
And YES, comparing Panasonic's own RAW still files to it's compressed codec video is very much like comparing BMD RAW video to Panny's compressed codec video. That is definitely a 'reasonable' comparison.
I sold my GH5 as soon as the Pocket 4k was announced, but I still have my GH4. They are two different tools for different jobs in my view. And NO, I've never encountered ANY h.264 or h.264 from any camera under $ten grand that produces footage that can be corrected, graded, altered, fixed, or pushed in post like Blackmagic RAW footage.
Makes sense to me. I sometimes miss my GH4. The Battery life on that thing was insane.
John Brawley
Well-known member
You know how there's a big difference between 8 bit and 10 bit and that was a big reason to like the GH5 ?
It's the same again when you go from 10 bit to 12 bit.
The P4K shoot uncompressed 12 bit LOG RAW DNG's or if you prefer at 3:1 and 4:1 compression.
Uncompressed 12 bit RAW.
More bits means better image fidelity, better secondary colour correction, nicer keys and that it's less likely to break when being pushed.
JB
Just because RAW can be manipulated more in grading doesn't automaticaly mean it can produce a better image. If you messed up your exposure or WB during a shoot then RAW may save the footage but I've yet to break 10bit 4.2.2 in any grade. Again I think people are in danger of expecting way too much from the P4K image based on a false notion that RAW is going to unlock vast amounts of hidden image data that panasonic have kept hidden - the 10bit 4.2.2 codec is very good and probably gives you 95% of what the sensor can do.
The GH5 codec was the reason I got it as it both looks nicer and grades more readily than my Sony's internal codec so yes I can tell the difference however If I can't break the 10 bit codec in a heavy grade then what is 12 bit going to help me with?
I don't understand all of this oppositional gesturing.. I think the P4K will compliment the GH cameras very nicely, I look forward to mine arriving. I also understand why Panasonic might wish to continue the development of their GH range throughout their lifecycle (and beyond
especially when other alternatives become available and I think we all benefit from these developments.fboonzaier
Well-known member
Probably some of the comments are due to the poor bedside manner from some posters....the BMPCK4K is great and now the GH5 is terrible? Aside from being ridiculous it's also offensive to those that bought GH cameras, deem the image lovely and use and will continue to use it. This thread really started as trolling a camera IMO and subsequently the members who own GH cameras....interestingly though, only the GH5...so only the camera that Panasonic makes that is the most groundbreaking with every release of any brand, in this category of camera. Now of course BMD has released their camera, and at least at this stage practically speaking, it looks like we have another winner! Personally nobody using a Canon would walk onto my set to come and shoot, and yet this is purely my creative and subjective choice....I do not like the "wonderful Canon colors" that everyone who does, talks about, but what does that even mean? The reality is that it's just my own narrow little viewpoint. When finally these cameras are compared side by side (yawn) there will be, as with most other cameras, shockingly little difference between the 2, yet more endless discussions about highlight rolloff, DR, noisy shadows and artificial sharpening in camera or in post. For those who can't wait to constantly sell and buy the next greatest thing, or own them all, I'm happy, except IMO you can spend your money in better places to improve the IQ of what you shoot, unless buying cameras is your hobby....like the next IPhone, Laptop or car. Personally, for me a camera is just a tool, and we are at a point these days, where if you're blaming the camera, you are looking in the wrong place IMO.
joe12south
Veteran
But when you add to the above the lack of artificial sharpening, lack of artificial noise reduction and lack of compression artifacts, then you are talking about a very different image. You can add that processing to a P4K image, you can't take it away from a GH5 image.
joe12south
Veteran
The GH-series is absolutely a great line of tools. The GH5's total feature-set is unmatched. There will remain a number of situations in which I will use it over the P4K. (Stills, IBIS, etc.) But there's just no way I can delude myself into saying that it is within punching weight of the P4K's imaging capability.I don't understand all of this oppositional gesturing.. I think the P4K will compliment the GH cameras very nicely, I look forward to mine arriving. I also understand why Panasonic might wish to continue the development of their GH range throughout their lifecycle (and beyond
Panasonic COULD compete if they wanted to, but at least to date, they don't. Philosophically, the GH-series is still a consumer line that records to a delivery codec. There is not a technical nor an economic reason this is has to be so, it's an artificial limitation that Canon, Sony, Panasonic philosophically support. It's a marketing game. BMD didn't "beat" the others at this game - they literal said, screw it, this game is stupid, we're going to playa different game.
joe12south
Veteran
This is an interesting point, as I absolutely do *not* want to continually feel the need to upgrade to the next thing. What I want is the "good enough" camera. For myself, and many others, the good enough camera is a camera body that doesn't have to apologize for any aspect of the image compared to film, and we can afford to purchase. That's my baseline. If a camera can do that, and has reasonable ergonomics, I'm good, my search is over.
The P4K gets tantalizingly close to the "good enough" camera. Based on what I've seen so far, the only area in which it falls short is dynamic range. By BMD's own measure, it's about 2 stops away from that threshold. We'll see my "good enough" camera within a generation or two. I whole-heartedly look forward to not wanting to upgrade my camera for better PQ.
John Brawley
Well-known member
As I mentioned in the post, better secondary corrections, nicer keys (for correction not VFX) and more robustness.
Do you use keys in colour correction ? Are you doing heavy secondaries work ? Higher bit depth and less compression makes those tasks easier.
JB
Last edited:
I'd disagree that these things constitute 'a very different image' due to the fact that Panasonic hasn't made an absolute hash of sharpening, compression and NR.
I don't disagree it has real benefits and hence why I am adding a P4K to my GH5 but I still say that ultimatley the final images are not going to be that far apart for most users esp if they already have a GH5s.
I find it really not fair to compare image quality by saying that the blackmagic can do RAW, and the GH can't. You can't compare RAW 12 bits with not-raw 10 bits.
Some people (like me) even if they have RAW at hand, won't use it because you have less recording time on your media, more storage needed and post production is heavier.
I do documentaries for TV and they just won't accept RAW for their post production workflows because it is just not their standart.
that said, I would compare 10 bits files from both cameras to really judge quality.
from what I've seen so far, BMP4K looks nice, but nothing I couldn't achieve with my GH5s. but you never know how they make their demo movies, and you have to compare scenes with same lens, same lights, ...
Anyway, side by side would be the best way to say in my opinion.
Some people (like me) even if they have RAW at hand, won't use it because you have less recording time on your media, more storage needed and post production is heavier.
I do documentaries for TV and they just won't accept RAW for their post production workflows because it is just not their standart.
that said, I would compare 10 bits files from both cameras to really judge quality.
from what I've seen so far, BMP4K looks nice, but nothing I couldn't achieve with my GH5s. but you never know how they make their demo movies, and you have to compare scenes with same lens, same lights, ...
Anyway, side by side would be the best way to say in my opinion.