GH5 Game Over, Panasonic

[joe12south]

I have a straight face on and I can say it may not be better for some. Go back to what Thomas said - not everyone wants to deal with RAW or huge data files. So for them, it is not better. Wow, I am really impressed with the BM4KP samples. They really have me wanting the camera. But I don't want one for other reasons. Besides, as we know, this format is dead now that 'everyone is moving to full-frame' September 25th - Game over Black Magic.... and so it goes on.

Better image quality is the context of the previous comments.

 

[mico]

I have a straight face on and I can say it may not be better for some. Go back to what Thomas said - not everyone wants to deal with RAW or huge data files. So for them, it is not better. Wow, I am really impressed with the BM4KP samples. They really have me wanting the camera. But I don't want one for other reasons. Besides, as we know, this format is dead now that 'everyone is moving to full-frame' September 25th - Game over Black Magic.... and so it goes on.

Several ttypes of Prores files to chose from are huge? Whatever you say.

Format is dead? Just like 16mm film - 1923 to , oh yeah - now

 

[icarusfilm]

It’s all down to reliability and stability.

 

[Thomas Smet]

I'm hard pressed to agree with you here. More testing will be done, of course. But so far, the Pocket is looking superior to the 5s on many fronts.

Different yes, superior no. Depends on your and each persons definition of superior. The look clearly jives with you but that doesn't mean it will for every user. Panasonic caters their look to a certain type of person but they are not fools and don't purposely make bad color just for the fun of it. I tend to find the Panasonic color to better match reality vs BMD color which has more of a fantasy look to it. If thats your thing for weddings then yes the Pocket is the better choice for you but don't assume it is superior just because its different. Coke is different to Pepsi but can one say one is superior over the other? In their mind yes it is but not in the minds of everybody.

 

[sgttom]

Different yes, superior no. Depends on your and each persons definition of superior. The look clearly jives with you but that doesn't mean it will for every user. Panasonic caters their look to a certain type of person but they are not fools and don't purposely make bad color just for the fun of it. I tend to find the Panasonic color to better match reality vs BMD color which has more of a fantasy look to it. If thats your thing for weddings then yes the Pocket is the better choice for you but don't assume it is superior just because its different. Coke is different to Pepsi but can one say one is superior over the other? In their mind yes it is but not in the minds of everybody.

The problem with accurate colors is life is not always beautiful. Its one thing when you have a large control of colors, makeup, and everything on a decent budget creative project, but when you don't pleasing is usually better then accurate. Of course it depends on the job like anything else.

I may be wrong but it seems to me that if Panasonic or Sony redid their color science to mimic Canon or Fuji, very few people would mind. Arri is known to have beautiful color science and its probably the most widely used digital camera in cinema.


I would say the BMP4K has a superior image. Putting the two against each other you'd be able to push the Black magic footage in ways you couldn't with the Panasonic. You could make the BM look like the panny but not vice versa. Though I agree with you just calling one camera better with specific comparison points in mind is silly. The GH5 is better for certain applications.

 

[Ted Ramasola]

Asia is now receiving their BM cameras. Thai DP unboxing his BM pocket 4k. BM has delivered. Thailand is closer to Australia so I guess it got there early!

 

[Sage]

You could make the BM look like the panny but not vice versa

This is something I wanted to take the temperature on -

What interest would there be in a solution to precisely match the GH5 to the P4K (and vice-verse)?
(would be indistinguishable from the other, no matter what is filmed)

 

[filmguy123]

This is something I wanted to take the temperature on -

What interest would there be in a solution to precisely match the GH5 to the P4K (and vice-verse)?
(would be indistinguishable from the other, no matter what is filmed)

Yes.

 

[stoneinapond]

I would say the BMP4K has a superior image....

That is a statement of preference. I would argue it is not superior. The latter is also a statement of preference.

So where does that get us? Does this constantly circular argument make us better film makers?

Yes it is...
No it's not...
Yes it is
No it's not...
YES IT IS............:crybaby:

 

[Thomas Smet]

The problem with accurate colors is life is not always beautiful. Its one thing when you have a large control of colors, makeup, and everything on a decent budget creative project, but when you don't pleasing is usually better then accurate. Of course it depends on the job like anything else.

I may be wrong but it seems to me that if Panasonic or Sony redid their color science to mimic Canon or Fuji, very few people would mind. Arri is known to have beautiful color science and its probably the most widely used digital camera in cinema.


I would say the BMP4K has a superior image. Putting the two against each other you'd be able to push the Black magic footage in ways you couldn't with the Panasonic. You could make the BM look like the panny but not vice versa. Though I agree with you just calling one camera better with specific comparison points in mind is silly. The GH5 is better for certain applications.

And yet Sage has created an amazing lut that does match the GH5 to the Arri. If Arri has amazing color and the GH5 can match the Arri doesn't that then mean the GH5 can then also have amazing color?

Color is also subjective and I still think its inaccurate to say the BMD has superior color.

Absolutely no to Panasonic matching Canon color. That right there proves my point about subjective color. I can't stand Canon color and Would sell every single piece of Panasonic gear I own at a pawn shop or give it to a homeless person if they butchered the camera that badly. If I wanted Canon color I would buy Canon. I buy Panasonic because I happen to really like Panasonic color. To each their own but color will always be subjective and never a fact. If you prefer BMD color thats awesome for you. Go buy a BMD and leave me to like my Panasonic color. You can attempt for a hundred years to convince me BMD color is better but I will never believe you so you might as well give up now. Its about as pointless of an argument as trying to convince somebody Pepsi is superior to Coke.

Every camera has different color. No camera has better color. Better to you is not better to everybody.

 

[joe12south]

There is no baked-in "Black Magic color" to the RAW files. They are RAW. BMD color science comes in the post-processing, just like RED color science. (Which is why you can take old REDRAW footage and process it with the newest color science and see significant improvement.) The GH5(s) color is baked-in. This alone is a clear advantage, even if every other aspect of the two cameras was exactly the same.

You can use a LUT like Sage's to approximate the response of another camera, but you can't recover information that wasn't there in the first place. You can't push a GH5 like you can an Arri, simply because there is an Arri-like LUT. A GH5's compressed LOG file is never gonna have the picture information of a Pocket 4K's 12-bit RAW file.

You may find the GH5's PQ good enough for your use. You might even prefer its baked-in processing, but, yes, we can still say that the Pocket 4K records a "better" (technically superior) image.

 

[Sage]

You can use a LUT like Sage's to approximate the response of another camera, but you can't recover information that wasn't there in the first place. You can't push a GH5 like you can an Arri, simply because there is an Arri-like LUT. A GH5's compressed LOG file is never gonna have the picture information of a Pocket 4K's 12-bit RAW file.

This is true. Though, I think you're going to like what's coming. I've been quietly tinkering away at a new update, and it has much to do with what you just noted. Details soon, I think.

And thanks Tom, I appreciate that.

 

[stoneinapond]

...but, yes, we can still say that the Pocket 4K records a "better" (technically superior) image.

...but no, you keep missing the point and arguing a fallacy. Being able to push post processing on an image could be seen as an ADVANTAGE to some, but superior., better...? (Try a dictionary.)

 

[Cary Knoop]

And yet Sage has created an amazing lut that does match the GH5 to the Arri. If Arri has amazing color and the GH5 can match the Arri doesn't that then mean the GH5 can then also have amazing color?

Some LUT does not make the ARRI color reproduction quality out of a BM 4K Pocket or a GH5.

It would be like saying a $100 stereo can sound like a $20,000 stereo because you matched the levels with an equalizer.

I really don't get it, BM comes out with a pocket camera that works great with color management, they even give away a Resolve license and the first things some people ask for is some LUT.

 

[Sage]

Some LUT does not make the ARRI color reproduction quality out of a BM 4K Pocket or a GH5.

It would be like saying a $100 stereo can sound like a $20,000 stereo because you matched the levels with an equalizer.

I really don't get it, BM comes out with a pocket camera that works great with color management, they even give away a Resolve license and the first things some people ask for is some LUT.

Cary, I love you man. I know you're never going to try my work, but I just wish I could shoot an Arri side by side with you, and really show you the integrity of what it is I do*

I've poured over the problem for ~18 months, and I think its really stunning. What I'm working on at this very moment is the very limit of what I can do - not just in absolute accuracy, but absolute smoothness. The problem with a color space calc is that it is not fully accurate to the result of an actual Alexa (why I set out on this laserquest). Simply, the tailored Lut is a lot more precise to my desired outcome. I previously bought any cited Arri Luts (and they weren't even close to the Alexa). I am admittedly, a fanatic.

 

[Cary Knoop]

Cary, I love you man. I know you're never going to try my work, but I just wish I could shoot an Arri side by side with you, and really show you the integrity of what it is I do*

Perhaps you misunderstand me, I have no problem with a LUT that tries to match things like an equalizer does in audio, and I understand that a lot of hard work goes into that.

But some claims, not made by you, I find go way over the top.

 

[sgttom]

And yet Sage has created an amazing lut that does match the GH5 to the Arri. If Arri has amazing color and the GH5 can match the Arri doesn't that then mean the GH5 can then also have amazing color?

Color is also subjective and I still think its inaccurate to say the BMD has superior color.

Absolutely no to Panasonic matching Canon color. That right there proves my point about subjective color. I can't stand Canon color and Would sell every single piece of Panasonic gear I own at a pawn shop or give it to a homeless person if they butchered the camera that badly. If I wanted Canon color I would buy Canon. I buy Panasonic because I happen to really like Panasonic color. To each their own but color will always be subjective and never a fact. If you prefer BMD color thats awesome for you. Go buy a BMD and leave me to like my Panasonic color. You can attempt for a hundred years to convince me BMD color is better but I will never believe you so you might as well give up now. Its about as pointless of an argument as trying to convince somebody Pepsi is superior to Coke.

Every camera has different color. No camera has better color. Better to you is not better to everybody.

I was going to get that LUT before I sold my GH5. I am not questioning or suggest you change your opinion on preferred color. But yes I do believe Panasonic would sell better if they changed their color science. I am not saying you would buy it, just speaking in general. By the way I really appreciate what Sage is doing as I do guys like Paul Leeming.

Not sure what exactly you are judging IQ on but any standpoint I can think of I don't know how you would argue the GH5 IQ is superior to the BMP4K IQ. Its literately the same sensor, just one camera isn't handicapped. You could say its more convenient, but not sure how you could say its better. Moot point I guess.

Is there really any point to this discussion though lol?? The BMP4K isn't going to put the GH series out of bussiness nor vice versa.

 

[Shirozina]

I think it's possible either with a LUT or RCM to make a GH5 footage mix with Arri footage in a timeline but that's not the same thing as claiming a GH5 can replace an Arri as a camera on set and I don't think Sage is claiming this either. I come from the world of stills and I know it's possible to get a reasonably good DSLR to match a high end MF back in certain circumstances but it can't match the subtle tonal and hue translations and graduations that a MF back can produce. For a start the CFA's on DSLR's tend to be quite weak to maximise low light ability and this has to come at the expense of colour fidelity and I'm sure the same will apply to Arri and RED sensors. Panasonic, Canon, Nikon, Sony etc only have to make the colour and tonal reproduction 'good enough' for general consumer use and strike a balance between sensitivity and colour reproduction. Arri, RED etc have to make them good enough for much higher standards of colour fidelity and high ISO capability is not so important just as it isn't with MF stills backs.

 

[joe12south]

...but no, you keep missing the point and arguing a fallacy. Being able to push post processing on an image could be seen as an ADVANTAGE to some, but superior., better...? (Try a dictionary.)

Nope. Not a fallacy at all. A recorded image that is closer to the actual scene information is technically superior. Visible artificial sharpening, visible artificial noise reduction and visible compression artifacts are all inferior to a signal that has not been molested by that processing.

 

[Thomas Smet]

Nope. Not a fallacy at all. A recorded image that is closer to the actual scene information is technically superior. Visible artificial sharpening, visible artificial noise reduction and visible compression artifacts are all inferior to a signal that has not been molested by that processing.

Its the language of choice here. Superior from a technical standpoint? Of course it is. Nobody here doubts raw is better than 150mbps video from a mathematical perspective. Nobody doubts 4:4:4 provides more color information than 4:2:2. Nobody doubts that less processing creates a more natural image.

none of us are arguing that. What we are arguing is the use of the terms inferior and superior like every person can tell the difference and its night and day. It might be to you but to others it is not.

I'm a VFX guy and at one point I was absolutely obsessed with uncompressed and raw video. Everything we do have an exponential loss when it comes to ROI. It isn't that we don't think the Pocket can produce images with more data its that we are not sure it matters all that much.

Does the Pocket have better compression quality? You betcha it does. It doesn't take a genius to understand that. Whats up for debate here is just how much does it really matter in the end.

Does the Pocket have less processing? Absolutely it does. Thats its entire point for existing and part of why its so cheap is BMD doesn't have to build a processor to handle that processing in the camera on the fly. Whats up for debate is just how important is that to everybody? I honestly get the impression some of you will have a heart attack if you see any sharpening or noise reduction done in camera. To others it removes the load in post and allows them to be creative constructing the edit/story vs messing around with camera processing. Even if one uses Prores and doesn't have to mess with raw they may need to use Neatvideo or sharpening to get to the look they actually want. No matter how amazing of a system one has Neatvideo is a bear to render 4k. Honestly I downloaded some of the ISO 3200 samples and tested them with NeatVideo and they still get that plastic video look once you do that so its not the GH5 noise reduction that hurts the material but noise reduction in general. If one wants that clean noiseless look they probably are better off just letting the GH5 or GH5s do it.

Does the Pocket have a better color/look to it? This is what I think is open for debate here. Some people love a certain look while others do not. This is what I consider to be different but not superior. Its a look that jives with some people but not all people. Yes if one shoots raw they can push the look in many directions and slap on a lut to get certain looks. Again that doesn't mean the camera has a better look to it. It means it has more flexibility in post to hone the look. Flexibility yes, superior look no. I would also argue when one learns how to use v-log properly it can have a lot of that same flexibility. Maybe not 100% accurate or flexible but enough so where I can do some seriously awesome work.

There is superior quality and then there is a waste of data that gains nothing to those working with the data or to the end user watching the data. This is where a lot of people are going to question the Pocket and if it really matters. Many of those people bought external recorders for ProRes and absolutely could not see a difference no matter how close they looked. That isn't to say the ProRes didn't have more data or better accuracy but that in the end it mattered little to those that bought the external recorders and they returned them.

So yes mathematically the Pocket records to a superior format. Does it really matter is what I think a lot are questioning here and can everybody even see it?

There is also the cost factor and that is amazing for the Pocket. Is does make the added quality capabilities even more attractive but I'm not convinced I will just be spending $1,300 on a camera if I buy the Pocket. There may be DIY power tricks out there but I also need something reliable and robust enough to be called a professional solution and not about to just velcro a phone power brick to the camera and call it done. At the very least I would want a cage with a slot for a SSD and a slot for a power solution with some kind of locking cable so it cannot be accidentally removed. The GH5 I have to go out of my way to accidentally remove the battery and if I do its on me for doing something boneheaded. Same goes for the SD card in the camera. I have to try really hard to screw that up. In a year or so when somebody makes a serious SSD and power solution that is professional and robust I will likely change my mind but until that happens it just isn't a professional solution to me. I'm not saying people will not get clever with how they attach power and storage to the camera but I'm not looking for a clever DIY solutions but professional solutions built to take a beating.