You'll notice with 60p and 120p at least.
GH5 Game Over, Panasonic
- Thread starter Jim Simon
- Start date
maybe...but do you use them all the time ?
I judge on my experience, and I shoot 25p (in france) 90% of the time. need some slowmo from time to time but I woulnd't change my camera only because the other one has a slightly better 120p.
John Brawley
Well-known member
I'd disagree with your disagreement
Image processing of any kind that's baked in isn't great if you're shooting to grade.
If you want it pre-cooked out of camera then of course it's ideal.
It's a frozen meal compared to something that's cooked from scratch. Not saying either that frozen meal isn't as nutritious and wholesome, it's just not the same as starting from scratch. And plenty of aspiring cooks can still "burn" the meal or get the ratios wrong too when starting from scratch so it's no guarantee of a better result.
JB
I'd disagree with your disagreement
Image processing of any kind that's baked in isn't great if you're shooting to grade.
If you want it pre-cooked out of camera then of course it's ideal.
It's a frozen meal compared to something that's cooked from scratch. Not saying either that frozen meal isn't as nutritious and wholesome, it's just not the same as starting from scratch. And plenty of aspiring cooks can still "burn" the meal or get the ratios wrong too when starting from scratch so it's no guarantee of a better result.
JB
I still think you are overstating a theoretical issue which will not be a practical problem /noticeable for most users. It's not like you even have complete control over the RAW processing either as you have no idea what is happening to the RAW data in the converter. BM's RAW processing only has pretty basic controls and I know from still's RAW apps that they all do hidden processing that you don't have control over so I don't buy your frozen food vs cooked from scratch comparison.I know you want to promote the P4K and I'm not disputing it's a great camera but seeing as it uses the same sensor as the GH5s and Panasonic have made some pretty sensible in camera processing choices it's just not credible that BM can create a radicaly better image quality even from RAW. I don't fundamentaly disagree with your technical points but I just think you are overstating it and I fear far too many people will interpret it as reason ( esp as you are a pro user with a privileged connection to BM) to sell their GH5/s as they will no longer be good enough now the P4k is out there
icarusfilm
Veteran
I know big production companies that produce doc series for big broadcasters who still shoot their arsenal of c300 mark1, why because nothing has changed the broadcasters are still 1080p/i they are as happy with the image as they were 5 years ago. In the end slow motion is used way less in real life than on Vimeo and everyone knows how to handle the footage and knows what to expect.
I still think you are overstating a theoretical issue which will not be a practical problem /noticeable for most users. It's not like you even have complete control over the RAW processing either as you have no idea what is happening to the RAW data in the converter. BM's RAW processing only has pretty basic controls and I know from still's RAW apps that they all do hidden processing that you don't have control over so I don't buy your frozen food vs cooked from scratch comparison.I know you want to promote the P4K and I'm not disputing it's a great camera but seeing as it uses the same sensor as the GH5s and Panasonic have made some pretty sensible in camera processing choices it's just not credible that BM can create a radicaly better image quality even from RAW. I don't fundamentaly disagree with your technical points but I just think you are overstating it and I fear far too many people will interpret it as reason ( esp as you are a pro user with a privileged connection to BM) to sell their GH5/s as they will no longer be good enough now the P4k is out there
It should be very noticeably better then the 120p on the GH5. We'll see if they release footage soon.
Doing live events I like shooting in 60p and 120p a lot so I can slow down in post. 100mbps doesn't seem nearly enough to get decent 120 frames per second. Seems like it should be more like 400mbps.
Doing live events I like shooting in 60p and 120p a lot so I can slow down in post. 100mbps doesn't seem nearly enough to get decent 120 frames per second. Seems like it should be more like 400mbps.
John Brawley
Well-known member
Perhaps. I think it depends on the user. These are cameras made for different users and they have some cross over of features. As someone that works constantly with images in 10 and 12 and 16 bit I can tell you it absolutely makes a difference every time I grade.
You're totally wrong.
BMD RAW is DNG.
DNG is an open standard.
It's basically a TIFF file with some extra metadata. cDNG is a DNG with some audio and TC files.
There's no extra under-the-hood or hidden processing other than what ever the application you're working within applies. It is actually more truly RAW than most RAW formats.
For example, you need an app that has the RED SDK to open a RED RAW file. You need a Sony SDK to open a Sony RAW file. No one really knows what secret sauce gets applied in a RED SDK file either. But you sure as hell can't open a R3D without one.
Guess what SDK you need to open a DNG ? None. Nadda. Nothing. None at all. Because it's an open standard file format that ANY app that can open a DNG can open.
Can you open a R3D in C1 ? Or Darktable ? Or in Irident ? Nope. But all these and more open a BMD DNG RAW file without any under the hood secret processing and no SDK or BMD file intervention.
DNG is the most open RAW format of all and you're totally wrong to state that there's any hidden processing you have no control over.
I believe that half the reason that there's so many poorly graded BMD examples out there is because the DNG file format is so open and this leads to very random results as users try to get different results in different apps and there's no unifying guide or defaults to start with. It starts with however the APPLICATION reads and interprets the file, not BMD's version of that.
So let's stop spreading this kind of mis-information because it's not true at all.
I'm just trying to point out something which I know to be true from my own experience. You can interpret this as me promoting a camera. I'm not paid to do so. I use many different cameras and have shot with GHx cameras in the past. I'm currently using and a fan of the Olympus OMD cameras and optics too.
I've never said it's "radically" better. But there is a significant difference between 10 bit and 12 bit and there's also a huge difference in the processed image you get from a GHx series camera and a less processed ProRes or RAW file from a BMD camera.
You say it's the same sensor but I don't believe anyone has ever confirmed that it's the same sensor. There are some important clues that tell me it's not.
What's not credible is you continuing to make untrue claims.
I don't fundamentaly disagree with your technical points but I just think you are overstating it and I fear far too many people will interpret it as reason ( esp as you are a pro user with a privileged connection to BM) to sell their GH5/s as they will no longer be good enough now the P4k is out there
I think you're being insecure. The GH will continue to sell well to the many users who WANT a pre-cooked image, who want AF and IBIS and a "regular" MILC / DSLR camera.
Some will want higher bit depth images and a less processed image or even just ProRes recording.
They're not the same camera, and it's pretty pointless to put them head to head because they serve different users.
JB
Cary Knoop
Veteran
I can't speak of the GH5s but after linearizing log footage for the GH5 and the BM 4K Pocket the difference is quite large and not just the dynamic range.
Also V-Log-L to me seems more like an afterthought than a carefully thought out color science.
I am not happy about the implementation, contrast that with 4K Film for the pocket camera which is pretty right from the start!
The hidden processing when using RAW is not in the camera and embedded in the RAW file but in the RAW app. You may like to reread my post before accusing me of spreading misinformation. You continue to use the words ' significant' and 'huge' when describing the advantages which I maintain is going to look overstated when the end results are compared. Insecure? - not me.I don't feel the need to defend a camera and as stated I will buy this camera on it's merits and use it side by side with my GH5 If I truly believed it will produce an image that is significantly or huge (ly) better I'd certainly have to reconcider this approach.
V-Log is not well implemented I agree hence why HLG is a popular alternative. I'm also not saying that the P4k RAW will not be better- it's just the degree to which this will be evident in the final footage seen side by side.
John Brawley
Well-known member
You meant the bit where you said it had poor RAW controls or that BMD have hidden processing ?
You’ve now accepted its the application itself, independent of BMD and camera that does all the processing, so we’re understanding each other now.
JB
Last edited:
Cary Knoop
Veteran
Depends what you mean by the final footage, obviously in 2018 you would not want to compare camera quality by compressing their footage in Rec.709.
Compare the linearized log, even if you only have a Rec.709 monitor you can shift values to see how good the footage is.
Again read my posts. I did not say poor RAW controls I said basic and I mean basic as compared to a stills RAW app like C1 or ACR. I also didn't say Resolve 'had' hidden processing - don't know if Resolve has hidden NR or sharpening or how good the demosaicing algorithm is but it's not beyond the realms of credibility to suggest they might be doing hidden stuff to sweeten the image or cut corners to speed up processing (err just like in camera processing) and like stills RAW apps do?
Obviously you have more manipulation potential with RAW, much more but again we will probably never agree on the significance of this for the average GH user who by definition is on a tight budget doing personal or non commercial jobs vs a commercial shooter like yourself who needs the absolute best and most flexible file they can get.
Last edited:
NorBro
Major Contributor
The black hole sun spot doesn't exist on every BM camera...the BMPC/URSA 4K sensor is the only one that has it.
The other cameras were fixed or never had it.
Last edited:
Bern Caughey
Veteran
John,
Been involved in testing a couple beta cameras so have some understanding how tricky that can be, & greatly appreciate your Pocket 4K work.
While I own a FS7, rent Alexa, & have access to URSA Mini Pros, I’ve also been using GH(s), & other small cameras, not because they’re inexpensive, but because they’re small, so suit a lot of the documentary work I shoot, especially abroad. Won’t stop using the GH5, but pre-ordered a Pocket 4K as a compliment for these gigs.
Wonder if you used IR filters on your tests, & if so, have you tested without? Also if you’ve spotted any moire? And simply out of curiosity, if you used any diffusion?
Thanks,
Bern
Last edited:
icarusfilm
Veteran
ISO 12234-2 standard raw image format, better known as TIFF/EP, basis of the raw format image, also supports non-raw or processed images.
DNG is the Adobe digital negative format, is an extension of the TIFF 6.0 format and is compatible with TIFF/EP, and uses various open formats and/or standards, including Exif metadata, XMP metadata, IPTC metadata, CIE XYZ coordinates, ICC profiles, and JPEG.
Raw image format is the data set of the image sensor described by metadata. Manipulating the image is a consequence of changing the metadata only; the data set remains intact.
The image sensor voltage is proportional to linear light. Sensor acquisition is usually 12-14 bit. 13 actual stops of linear light cannot be contained within the 12 bit word even as it easily is more than enough to accommodate all 13 stops as non-linear light. This is the opto electrical transfer function. Yet the premise of raw to the video maker is that you bypass OETF processing and work directly through the metadata on the underlying data set of the imager.
Can't have it both ways; no 13 actual stops of DR without OETF pre-processing of the raw data set.
This has been widely discussed in related forums.
DNG is the Adobe digital negative format, is an extension of the TIFF 6.0 format and is compatible with TIFF/EP, and uses various open formats and/or standards, including Exif metadata, XMP metadata, IPTC metadata, CIE XYZ coordinates, ICC profiles, and JPEG.
Raw image format is the data set of the image sensor described by metadata. Manipulating the image is a consequence of changing the metadata only; the data set remains intact.
The image sensor voltage is proportional to linear light. Sensor acquisition is usually 12-14 bit. 13 actual stops of linear light cannot be contained within the 12 bit word even as it easily is more than enough to accommodate all 13 stops as non-linear light. This is the opto electrical transfer function. Yet the premise of raw to the video maker is that you bypass OETF processing and work directly through the metadata on the underlying data set of the imager.
Can't have it both ways; no 13 actual stops of DR without OETF pre-processing of the raw data set.
This has been widely discussed in related forums.
John Brawley
Well-known member
All BMD cameras process internally at at least 16 bit LIN fron the sensor, and once encoded to DNG a LOG transform to 12bit is applied.
The same way Arri do with Arri RAW.
JB
The same way Arri do with Arri RAW.
JB
joe12south
Veteran
Um, simple published log-curve. No secret voodoo.