GH5 Game Over, Panasonic

I've been feeling like this is all very similar to the original pocket and GH4 for me. Neither is a substitute for the other, and frankly I'll want both.

Though it does help make the decision between the GH5 and GH5s easier. I feel like the pocket fills the gap in the GH5s more, that way I can enjoy IBIS and better photo capabilities of the original GH5.
 
DBP said:
I've been feeling like this is all very similar to the original pocket and GH4 for me. Neither is a substitute for the other, and frankly I'll want both.

Though it does help make the decision between the GH5 and GH5s easier. I feel like the pocket fills the gap in the GH5s more, that way I can enjoy IBIS and better photo capabilities of the original GH5.
Click to expand...
Pretty much my thoughts, exactly. As a true hybrid, the GH5 holds its own. It's the overpriced GH5S that looks bad in comparison.
 
Depends what you want. I have GH5 and GH5S and the GH5 is the one I would change as all my shoots are on tripods and inside. Don't need stills ( never taken a still on either camera ) and the reason I got both was for the UHD60P capability compared to buying a really expensive camcorder like the FS7. Camcorders that can shoot UHD60P are still about the same price as getting both the GH5 and the GH5S with one lens !!! Though of course they would have a servo zoom a nice advantage I would pay for on the GH series. I need to shoot for about 2 hours for most projects sometimes 2 hour and 45 mins. So powering and media are important. For me the image quality is noticeably better on the GH5S than the GH5 another reason the GH5 would be the one to go.
 
I have an fs7 zeiss primes etc. I have a GH5 and some voigtlanders specifically to travel ultralight shoot completely low key with available light. For certain kind of productions the one tool is better than the other. Which is why the whole „game over“ is utter nonsense, the camera image IQ is just one little piece of a much larger puzzle.


Ron Evans said:
Depends what you want. I have GH5 and GH5S and the GH5 is the one I would change as all my shoots are on tripods and inside. Don't need stills ( never taken a still on either camera ) and the reason I got both was for the UHD60P capability compared to buying a really expensive camcorder like the FS7. Camcorders that can shoot UHD60P are still about the same price as getting both the GH5 and the GH5S with one lens !!! Though of course they would have a servo zoom a nice advantage I would pay for on the GH series. I need to shoot for about 2 hours for most projects sometimes 2 hour and 45 mins. So powering and media are important. For me the image quality is noticeably better on the GH5S than the GH5 another reason the GH5 would be the one to go.
Click to expand...
 
I'm guessing that there will be places where one camera is better for the job than the other. Pretty sure there will still be room for both in the larger ecosystem.
 
No No....Jim said "Game Over". Panasonic is beaten. We're all in denial. Kneel to BMC now!
 
Last edited:
Panasonic is not over but they are being put in a corner. Outside of all the greatness that is the GH series, True RAW recording for $1400 is very difficult to compete with. Imho, they offer hybrid value going forward because BM out spec'd them. Can/will they offer RAW video? Time will tell but it is pretty clear those making camera decisions between a BMPC4k and a GH5s are going to choose the BM most of the time.

This FF rumor camera could be a step to counter the BM but anything short of RAW recording is going to be a slight let down from now on. I never liked the whole LOG approach gray mess, so I am firmly in the RAW camp but love IBIS, so I am hoping Panasonic has a fire underneath them even more than before! My work is too varied to not have hand holding capability and AF. Quite a battle going on in this space.
 
NorBro said:
Never saw the GH5S this low...but maybe just missed it:

$2026.19 - https://www.amazon.com/Mirrorless-S...pID=51CvOLE8pCL&preST=_SY300_QL70_&dpSrc=srch
Click to expand...

Still too pricey for me, I'd rather buy a Panasonic G85 on the cheap for my vlogging, but exciting for what this means next year for eBay prices!

I think I can already see GH5 prices secondhand on eBay being cheaper than a new BMPCC4K (and it will be tough to find a secondhand BMPCC4K for sale any time this year, or probably even next year. Not at a significant discount), and hopefully a GH5S might be catching up. (as I'd use a G85 when IBIS is used, but a GH5S any other time)
 
Bassman2003 said:
Panasonic is not over but they are being put in a corner. Outside of all the greatness that is the GH series, True RAW recording for $1400 is very difficult to compete with. Imho, they offer hybrid value going forward because BM out spec'd them. Can/will they offer RAW video? Time will tell but it is pretty clear those making camera decisions between a BMPC4k and a GH5s are going to choose the BM most of the time.

This FF rumor camera could be a step to counter the BM but anything short of RAW recording is going to be a slight let down from now on. I never liked the whole LOG approach gray mess, so I am firmly in the RAW camp but love IBIS, so I am hoping Panasonic has a fire underneath them even more than before! My work is too varied to not have hand holding capability and AF. Quite a battle going on in this space.
Click to expand...

The BM's option for dynamic range during RAW recording will be locked to 'Film' and that's LOG.

---

Also, I really can't say I see a massive difference between the 4K Pocket and the GH5S.

In 2012/2013, the BMCC provided a shocking difference vs. the competition. Same with the BMPCC and even later the BMPC just as the FS7 was rolling out.

The point of RAW recording is something I always stressed heavily and have exhausted since 2012, but at this point when both cameras are producing interchangeable looks (IMO) - especially on YouTube/Vimeo (99% of most people's works) - it's like who cares anymore, ha.
 
NorBro said:
The BM's option for dynamic range during RAW recording will be locked to 'Film' and that's LOG.
Click to expand...
Not exactly. One of 3 profiles is non-destructively included in the BRAW file's metadata (Film, Extended Video, Video). This approach gives all of the ease/speed of a baked-in look, but allows the flexibility to change your mind later.

Also, I really can't say I see a massive difference between the 4K Pocket and the GH5S.
Click to expand...
"Massive"? Maybe not. That's a pretty subjective term. The GH5S' noise reduction is visible. The artificial sharpening is noticeable, as well. And you have no choice – you can't turn them off. The camera decides for you.
 
Yea, the BRAW is working just like a RED, but what are you initially exposing for?

I guess it doesn't matter anymore, really.
 
NorBro said:
Yea, the BRAW is working just like a RED, but what are you initially exposing for?

I guess it doesn't matter anymore, really.
Click to expand...
No, getting the ISO in the right neighborhood still matters because you are tuning the sensitivity range of the sensor. In this case, with a dual-native sensor, you've *definitely* got two "cliffs" to consider. There's an interview with a BMD rep that explains it really well. If I stumble upon it again, I'll share here.
 
What you're describing - if I understand you correctly - is something you were always able to do and that's change the gamma from 'Film' to 'Video'...and other settings. ('Extended' was only released earlier this year in the URSA Broadcast.)

I'm not sure if you're new to RAW or I am completely missing something - which is a very strong possibility as I haven't done any research on Blackmagic RAW at all (and would love to see the interview) - but that's how non-destructive RAW in general usually works.

But...not sure why you would want to change to the 10-stop baked-in 'Video' DR setting after deciding to shoot CDNGs. At least with the REDs, you have flatter gammas/color spaces to choose from and tweak.

IMO, it's a silly concept to have in mind because no one's going to shoot RAW and then later decide to apply such a setting. You could just use ProRes LOG and transform the image later if you're really hesitating and decide that you just would like a baked-in look.
 
I think we're saying basically the same thing, I was only highlighting the specific way that BMD cameras and Resolve integrate. Now with BRAW this is upped a notch with the addition of a "sidecar" text/JSON file that overrides the metadata encapsulated in the RAW file for even more flexibility.

The "Video" setting is a good starting point for a lot of projects, even when shooting RAW, as your starting point will be rec709 safe, but you retain the ability to push it to taste in Resolve.
 
That reason above is why they pretty much created the extended mode...something kind of ready to go with “extended” DR compared to a Rec709 profile. The video mode can be harsh.
 
NorBro said:
That reason above is why they pretty much created the extended mode...something kind of ready to go with “extended” DR compared to a Rec709 profile. The video mode can be harsh.
Click to expand...

It shouldn't be, not if it's raw. But is it? It's log encoded raw data, the dataset itself being described by metadata. All that needs to happen is a de-log transformation. Should be lossless. And if it were, then why the need for the other profiles?

I'm not stating anything, I'm asking the question, why are the other profiles needed? Why would they not just de-log into the rec709 or other profile? Is the profile even set in-camera or is this purely on the resolve end?
 
My view of RAW in 2018 is anyone may call their technology whatever they would like. It's never wrong because these people can decide what RAW is for them.

And it's about making more money, always.

[I gave up understanding after Canon's 'Cinema RAW Light'.]

---

None of us know exactly what's happening no matter what anyone tells us, and we only hope we're recording as much sensor data as they will provide us, and have as much flexibility in post as the software allows us.

As far as Blackmagic, the DR setting inside the camera is locked to 'FILM' during RAW operation, but you are able to change your gamma to 'EXTENDED' or 'VIDEO' later in post. That's the non-destructive process.

However, if you choose the 'EXTENDED' or 'VIDEO' DR setting in the camera, you will no longer be shooting RAW because that option is not allowed as mentioned, and the camera automatically switches to ProRes or it's grayed out in RAW, whatever it is. So then you are no longer shooting RAW and you are burning in your 'extended' or 'video' information into the ProRes clips.

You cannot later change these ProRes clips back to 'FILM'...which ironically is what ProRes RAW seems like, ha.

Only when you shoot RAW, you have that flexibility, obviously.

Not sure if that answers your question...

---

This concept is very similar to what RED has been doing for the last 10+ years, but the difference and the reason (IMO) they offered different options in RAW is because you had no other choice but to shoot REDCODE for many years. (They only recently in the last 2-3 years started implementing various ProRes and AVID formats.)

At some point in time, I am assuming someone thought the same thing and thought it would be a good idea to offer the user the option to change to a more REC709 friendly look after the fact.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top