GH5 Game Over, Panasonic

joe12south said:
I don't *think* v90 cards could handle the data rate for 4:4:4 at a reasonable quality ratio, but everything else would be eminently doable in a firmware upgrade that would buy Panasonic a ton of pro cred and goodwill.

You're so right about V-LOG L. Once they opened that door, the argument that level of image control would be bad/confusing for less experienced users flew away. I really would love to know why they won't do this. They must have some logic to this intentional decision, but it escapes me.
Click to expand...

Given how good 10bit 4:2:2 looks at 150mbps on the GH5 I think there could be a very solid 200mbps 4:4:4 which is easily handled on SD cards. Even the GH4 had a 200mbps mode that was supported by SD cards. While still heavily compressed I think a lot would find it a nice alternative to raw at a very small footprint. All-I may be more difficult but even BMD devices support ProRes422 HQ on SD cards which is around 800mbps give or take depending on frame rate. Given how good the 400mbps looks on the GH5 for 4:2:2 10bit I think going up to 600 or 800mbps would be more than enough for 4:4:4
 
From my reading, v90 SD cards were fast enough to handle ProRes RAW. So I think what an SD card could handle these days for codecs, and by the time GH6 hits shelves, should be pretty robust... not to mention the ever increasing efficiency of codecs, such as h.265.
 
icarusfilm said:
The olympus Pro 12-100mm f4 is exceptional


QUOTE=Shirozina;1986769462]The 12-60 Leica is OK - but not amazing. I find I need 5.6 to get optimal sharpness out to the edges. The 12-40 is exceptionally good - sharp wide open at 2.8 right across the frame and with nice MF control as well. Best of the bunch in many ways is the old OL 12-60 2.8-4 SWD but it has no usable AF and is big and heavy but needs no software correction and has a bit of image 'mojo' about it when used wide open.....
Click to expand...
[/QUOTE]

I may yet add this to my collection......
 
Do they have an exceptional 12-100 for S35/APS-C? I could live easier with f/4 there, or speedboost it to M43...

That would be nice!
 
I agree, but especially for the bmccp it would makes very useful lens for barebones shooting as it has verygood IS and the best manual focus implementation I’ve seen on a native m43 lens.


filmguy123 said:
Do they have an exceptional 12-100 for S35/APS-C? I could live easier with f/4 there, or speedboost it to M43...

That would be nice!
Click to expand...
 
Thomas Smet said:
Given how good 10bit 4:2:2 looks at 150mbps on the GH5 I think there could be a very solid 200mbps 4:4:4 which is easily handled on SD cards. Even the GH4 had a 200mbps mode that was supported by SD cards. While still heavily compressed I think a lot would find it a nice alternative to raw at a very small footprint. All-I may be more difficult but even BMD devices support ProRes422 HQ on SD cards which is around 800mbps give or take depending on frame rate. Given how good the 400mbps looks on the GH5 for 4:2:2 10bit I think going up to 600 or 800mbps would be more than enough for 4:4:4
Click to expand...

Maybe, but there is a reason almost every codec starts by doing two things: YCrBr conversion and 4:2:2 downsampling - the required data rate is massively reduced with little perceived loss. The data rate would start at about 4X otherwise.

Maybe 4:4:4 could reasonably fit into 400Mbps ... I wouldn't kick it out of bed. ;-)
 
Last edited:
joe12south said:
Maybe, but there is a reason almost every codec starts by doing two things: YCrBr conversion and 4:2:2 downsampling - the required data rate is massively reduced with little perceived loss. The data rate would start at about 4X otherwise.

Maybe 4:4:4 could reasonably fit into 400Mbps ... I wouldn't kick it out of bed. ;-)
Click to expand...

4:4:4 only requires 33% more data. 12 total color samples vs 8 of 4:2:2. Technically 225mbps should be enough over 150mbps to equal a similar level of compression quality as the 4:2:2. If they want to bump that up to 250 or 300mbps I’m not going to complain. If they could manage the 400mbps for a more processor intensive IPB then we know there are enough cards out there to support that datarate. 400mpbs IPB may actually be overkill for even 4:4:4. At a certain point more bits don’t really help an IPB encoder.
 
Shirozina said:
Best of the bunch in many ways is the old OL 12-60 2.8-4 SWD but it has no usable AF and is big and heavy but needs no software correction and has a bit of image 'mojo' about it when used wide open.....
Click to expand...

I like the old 4/3 F2 zooms, the 12-35 especially. I wish Olympus re-did a m4/3 version of those but they would be very expensive and large for a "consumer" format.

I've been an "Olympus Visionary" since before the EM5 MK2 and shot Olympus since the E1, their first 4/3 camera. I've been specifically consulting to try and give film maker feedback to Olympus. One thing I have learned about Olympus....they are an optics company before anything else. Optics are their soul. I've travelled a few times to the R&D facility in Tokyo and we've talked a great deal about making Olympus optics more filmmaker friendly.

I think the PRO series are really stunning optically, especially the 1.2 primes. But it's great to see Olympus introduce great manual focus options too. The MF clutch on the PRO lenses works really really well. I did a bunch of the first public P4K shoots using PRO zooms . (the 12-100) and the 1.2 Pro Primes.

And by the way, the 12-100 IS works great on the P4K.

(Some Pro stills from the last week on my set. Who says m4/3 doesn't have DOF)
https://flic.kr/s/aHsmtGQHDe
 
TheTrickster said:
Found this on youtube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-GCk2DPI6A

For me, they are very similar - if anything too similar...The only thing that Panasonic can do now, is slash the price to compete.

The upcoming FW updates have no mention of improved codec's, raw etc - so it comes down to price
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure about that. The image isn't the only reason some people choose one camera before another. The GH5s is weather sealed, smaller, has a flip out screen, has autofocus (although it's not great), has better battery life and can be controlled with a smartphone. Blackmagic's QC might be better now, but for some that is important too. If only the image is the important thing, then the BMPCC4K is the obvious choice. I have the GH5s but will also get the BMPCC4K (and keep the GH5s) since Resolve is included in the price.

Here in Sweden the GH5s is only approx. 230 US dollars more (ex VAT), if you know where to look.
 
I have the GH5 and the GH5S also Resolve Studio. I agree that they are very similar in that video, also that most of my reasons for shooting is not the film look. It is to archive an event in UHD. Functional operation is at times more important. My long 2 hour shoots would require a lot of extra equipment for the BMPCC4k like SSD and battery supply as well as another monitor as my shoots are a lot of the time above my head on a tripod. I supply extra battery power to my GH5's and use the Panasonic app on my tablet to control. For me getting the Atomos Ninja V is of more use in also being able to monitor, record with different codec ( same as BMPCC4K ) and still control the camera with the app and see the effect on the Atomos.
 
Milan O. said:
I'm not so sure about that. The image isn't the only reason some people choose one camera before another. The GH5s is weather sealed, smaller, has a flip out screen, has autofocus (although it's not great), has better battery life and can be controlled with a smartphone. Blackmagic's QC might be better now, but for some that is important too. If only the image is the important thing, then the BMPCC4K is the obvious choice. I have the GH5s but will also get the BMPCC4K (and keep the GH5s) since Resolve is included in the price.

Here in Sweden the GH5s is only approx. 230 US dollars more (ex VAT), if you know where to look.
Click to expand...

For the record, the P4K is also controllable from a smartphone. It also has reliable autofocus, just not flaky continuous autofocus.
 
If one works with either of these cameras, the price difference is really irrelevant....what is always relevant though, is the usability of a camera under any conditions...where I would not personally attempt to make a feature film with a GH5 for what IMO are the obvious reasons, (My choice would be the Varicam LT or 35) I would not hesitate to send a second unit out with a GH5/S to capture footage at a different location while working with first unit...the people who would notice when the film was done, are not my audience anyway, and some of the greatest films ever made are full of noisy footage, glaring continuity errors and wardrobe hair or make up failures....amazingly I have never read a single film review where the complaint was tha a camera did not match, or the highlight rolloff was too harsh or the image was not cinematic enough (would be very interested in one day seeing a clear standard as to what this means!...except for the fact that over 6 features, some 150 plus high end vignette style commercials and a few years of TV series, I have never heard either the words filmic or cinematic on a set. I like the "Pocket" but would never swap my GH5 for it (either would be used as a Bcam) as image notwithstanding, the programmability of the camera though initially very complex is quite remarkable IMO....of course I recognize the difference in people's desire/needs/use...there however is a world of difference between producing 1 minute beautiful clips for YouTube and working with actors while a $150,000 crew is standing waiting for you...that's when the choice of camera comes into play, and perhaps one of the main reasons Arris are used so much...when you need it, the camera just works!
 
TheTrickster said:
Found this on youtube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-GCk2DPI6A

For me, they are very similar - if anything too similar...The only thing that Panasonic can do now, is slash the price to compete.

The upcoming FW updates have no mention of improved codec's, raw etc - so it comes down to price
Click to expand...

These kind of "tests" kinda drive me bonkers. You could shoot that same scene with that same method and come to roughly the same conclusions about a current Arri or RED.
 
I saw an ARRI/P4K/GH5 comparison on youtube yesterday, there are certainly reasons to chose an ARRI camera, even on Youtube the image differences were pretty clear. But I think the Pocket has some capabilities when pushed beyond what you would consider normal that it might be a better choice (sometimes) over a GH5.
 
There are different reasons why someone chooses to use a specific tool.
I prefer a balanced shoulder mounted camera for certain type of jobs.
Priorities: 1. IQ, 2.operability, 3.Reliability, 4.size/weight/Form

If I choose a small form factor camera:
Priorities: 1.size/weight/Form, 2.operability, 3.Reliability, 4. IQ

which is why when im not using my FS7 or renting an Arri I am using the gh5 as the A camera and the GH5s as the B-camera because of IBIS. If I were to get the P4K it would swap out the GH5s as camera B and GH5 will stay camera A. Downn the road I might switch out the GH5 for the FF Panasonic as Cam A.
There is a certain level of IQ that needs to be achieved but but beyond that other aspects are more e important.
 
IBIS is a major differentiator for video shooters. That's why I don't try to compare the GH5 and the P4K. Two different ideal use cases. The GH5S, though, is pretty easy to compare the P4K. Their list of ideal use cases is more similar than different.

For my particular uses, the GH5 gets removed from my professional work (gimbal/steadicam/tripod/slider/dolly/crane negates IBIS) but will remain my go to personal camera because of the stills capability. If you like/need to shoot as stripped down as possible, though, you just can't beat IBIS. Since I'm going to be building a rig anyhow (I've never actually liked the DSLR form factor - it's just been the only way to get a large sensor image,) the form factor differences are inconsequential.
 
Greg_E said:
I saw an ARRI/P4K/GH5 comparison on youtube yesterday, there are certainly reasons to chose an ARRI camera, even on Youtube the image differences were pretty clear.
Click to expand...
Well, sure, but depending on what tests you do those differences will either be apparent of hidden. There are already plenty of clips floating around YouTube and Vimeo that reveal the P4K's IQ differences.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top