GH5 Game Over, Panasonic

I was wondering why all the sample test footages did not use RAW. Only Prores. Considering you are finally releasing first footage from a much anticipated product where one of its best feature is ability to shoot in raw, makes you wonder why.
Jim Brawley also did the ursa minis' samples and he pushed their limits shooting in raw and even put out sample raw files for download. This makes me think something is not yet ready with this camera.
 
There are four clips released already, and they all look great. It has plenty of detail, good dynamic range, nice colors, and no obvious issues. I don't usually preorder cameras, but I pulled the trigger on this one after seeing those sample videos.

They're posting all the videos here:
https://vimeo.com/blackmagicdesign
 
I'm going to wait and see if Fuji gets things closer to right before I decide. I have a bunch invested in Fuji and it would be nice to have a single camera for stills or video.
 
I think cameras are pretty good these days and that makes expectations somewhat unrealistic. If a 1300 Dollar cameras gives you a file that has enough bandwidth to punch it into form in post then its really amazing.
 
Since the GH5s has 240fps I was hoping the BM camera would offer the same framerate but it seems 120fps is the upper limit. That would help my decision to buy. The both look great.
 
The sensor may be the same but I don't see why it matters. The big draw is RAW and Prores recording as well as 12bit color up to 60p in 4k.

The GH5s was capped at 4k 60p 8 bit, very brittle footage at 150mbps. The BM can also do RAW 120fps. The GH5s does up to 240fps but again its 8 bit 100mbps, really crappy. The fixed noise pattern above 60fps on the GH5s also makes the footage almost unusable.

We can actually get RAW data from the sensor on the black magic pocket, so we won't be crippled by noise reduction ghosting that is forced on you if you get a GH5S. Also high bitrate 60 and 120fps in 10 and 12 bit.

I don't think I am getting this camera, maybe a used one later next year. But I can't understate how crazy the specs are.
 
Yeah when it comes to slow motion I would take a cropped but accurate and clean 120fps vs a crudely and horribly scaled/pixel binned 240 fps on the GH5s. The GH5s slow motion is fine for experiments and playing around but the BMD slow motion has it where it counts when it comes to quality.

Honestly if you want 240 fps that bad shoot 120fps on the BMD with a 1/480th shutter and do a 50% optical flow in post. That only needs to create a single in-between frame between each frame and the shutter speed ensures the results are clean and easy to calculate. I can almost guarantee the results will look cleaner and more accurate.
 
Right now I shoot with an RX10 II at 240fps and also apply a 50% reduction. Just hoping to better what I have now. The BMDP4k might be better than the RX10 II in slomo image quality, but at only 120fps it is tough to justify it.
 
The footage looks great, especially for $1300 camera.
Who needs 240+ Fps? Probably not too many. It seem that many want the super slow motion capabilities without really needing it. I will take gorgeous 60p before crappy 240fps.
 
joe12south said:
Sensor choice is just one variable out of the many factors that determine final picture quality. Canon, Panasonic and Sony could (and have) all used the same Sony sensor from time to time, and yet come away with demonstrably different images.
The BMPCC4K delivers an image quite different from a GH5(s).
Click to expand...

Actually I was thinking the opposite, that the image is virtually identical to the GH5s from what I have shot scenes similar to Wyatt and Brawley. The image that BMPCC4K is a departure from is the Ursa Mini Pro, looks nothing like it.
 
sgttom said:
Apparently they used up to 10,000 iso. All looks superb.
Click to expand...

It's stated on the details that they used ISOs 1000 to 3200. But in the quoted statement from John He stated "When you can get really great pictures at ISO3200 and above, things suddenly get very interesting." so perhaps they used higher iso. Would have been nice they labeled the shots with iso used.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top