GH5 Game Over, Panasonic

[joe12south]

Yes and we totally agree on this. What we disagree on is that people still value the GH5S for various different reasons and some may actually prefer it to the p4k or the gh5. Not everybody would want that option to turn it off.

My primary gripe with the GH5S is the price gouging, which looks all the more egregious when compared to the P4K's price. Otherwise I might have picked it before there was the P4K. It does offer a nice little bump in color accuracy over the GH5.

 

[flinty]

When the GH5 came out it was the best thing since sliced bread,now in this everlasting boring thread its scorned non stop by some on here,mine doesnt need a bump in color accuracy the colors are great and acccurate,and neither the S or P4K would be as good for wildlife which matters to me.

 

[Thomas Smet]

My primary gripe with the GH5S is the price gouging, which looks all the more egregious when compared to the P4K's price. Otherwise I might have picked it before there was the P4K. It does offer a nice little bump in color accuracy over the GH5.

Price gouging? Really?

In my 20+ years in production I never thought I would hear anybody consider $2,500 price gouging for a 10bit 4:2:2 DCI 4k camera that shoots to log and has uncompressed output with the low light capabilities of a s35mm camera.

 

[Cary Knoop]

I am a GH5 and GH5S owner and have just bought an Atomos Ninja V. Not to get necessarily ProRes recording rather than h264 but so that I can record 10bit 4:2:2 HLG UHD 60P from my cameras. I am likely to disappoint some of you film makers but I like the smooth look, shoot and finish in 60P for that reason. All my stuff is long about 2 hours mainly so shooting in h264 is fine and I expect if Panasonic like Sony had available HLG UHD 60 in 8 bit I would use it. I will now be able to use the GH5 feeding the Atomos and the GH5S shooting V log. That way I can get an archive from the GH5 of the event and use both to edit to any other output. I have no control over lighting for anything I shoot so low light capability of the GH5S is good.

4k@60 is cool! 4k@120 will be even better!

What gamers have long ago discovered is that high frame rates are more realistic, sharper and just cooler.
This is only now slowly realized with video makers, but some will undoubtedly stick with what they think is the "magic" 24p.

Think about it, what is really sharp with a 1/48 of a second shutter speed? Oh right the wallpaper in the background!

 

[joe12south]

Price gouging? Really?

In my 20+ years in production I never thought I would hear anybody consider $2,500 price gouging for a 10bit 4:2:2 DCI 4k camera that shoots to log and has uncompressed output with the low light capabilities of a s35mm camera.

And yet there is one that records 4K 60P RAW internally and costs about half that sitting on my tripod.

 

[joe12south]

4k@60 is cool! 4k@120 will be even better!

What gamers have long ago discovered is that high frame rates are more realistic, sharper and just cooler.
This is only now slowly realized with video makers, but some will undoubtedly stick with what they think is the "magic" 24p.

Think about it, what is really sharp with a 1/48 of a second shutter speed? Oh right the wallpaper in the background!

You're all heretics. Don't blame me when Christopher Nolan's Cinematic Inquisition hauls you away.

 

[icarusfilm]

in 2008 I would have bought the GH5s for 15-20K

Price gouging? Really?

In my 20+ years in production I never thought I would hear anybody consider $2,500 price gouging for a 10bit 4:2:2 DCI 4k camera that shoots to log and has uncompressed output with the low light capabilities of a s35mm camera.

 

[Thomas Smet]

4k@60 is cool! 4k@120 will be even better!

What gamers have long ago discovered is that high frame rates are more realistic, sharper and just cooler.
This is only now slowly realized with video makers, but some will undoubtedly stick with what they think is the "magic" 24p.

Think about it, what is really sharp with a 1/48 of a second shutter speed? Oh right the wallpaper in the background!

Yeah because video games didn’t have motion blur. When you remove motion blur lower frame rates are extremely ugly and difficult to watch. It was easier to just increase the frame rate than it was to create real-time motion blur in games. Same effect in the end and the details focused on in games made more sense to not have motion blur. We really do want to see every little detail when we play games because we don’t want to miss something.

Story telling is not exactly the same thing and we don’t always want to see every single detail moving all the time and it can actually bother people to see too many details.

 

[rsbush]

4k@60 is cool! 4k@120 will be even better!

What gamers have long ago discovered is that high frame rates are more realistic, sharper and just cooler.

Soap operas discovered that long before gamers. I guess some people think they're cool too.

 

[Thomas Smet]

And yet there is one that records 4K 60P RAW internally and costs about half that sitting on my tripod.

So what? It’s not the same camera. The A7S costs more as well as does a lot of other cameras. I fail to see the point why the cost of the p4k which is a niche camera somehow means Panasonic is price gouging. They set the price long before the p4k was announced. It’s also a camera with a lot more built into it in terms of R&D. It’s vastly more difficult and expensive to design a camera to record to h.264 then it is to raw or ProRes422. I realize that seems completely opposite to what you gain for the formats but it’s true. H.264 in a 10bit flavor is very expensive to develop. The processing power in the GH5S is vastly higher than that in the p4k. So yeah that should cost more because it costs Panasonic a lot more to design and manufacture the camera.

 

[Ron Evans]

60P delivery? You're dead to me.

PS. 8-bit HLG would not be HLG. 10-bit is part of the specification.

Yes, I like a sample rate of 60 whether that is 60i or 60P and would like it even faster to get a clean sharp image. Shooting at 60P gives me that option. We will of necessity need maybe 120fps for 8K rather than give the viewers a headache. My comment on 8bit HLG was that Sony already do this on their cameras and I would use it on mine if it was there. It isn't as Panasonic have stayed with it being only 10bit. Fine with me and another case where Sony are trying to avoid implementing on their lower cost cameras.

 

[joe12south]

So what? It’s not the same camera. The A7S costs more as well as does a lot of other cameras. I fail to see the point why the cost of the p4k which is a niche camera somehow means Panasonic is price gouging. They set the price long before the p4k was announced. It’s also a camera with a lot more built into it in terms of R&D. It’s vastly more difficult and expensive to design a camera to record to h.264 then it is to raw or ProRes422. I realize that seems completely opposite to what you gain for the formats but it’s true. H.264 in a 10bit flavor is very expensive to develop. The processing power in the GH5S is vastly higher than that in the p4k. So yeah that should cost more because it costs Panasonic a lot more to design and manufacture the camera.

The GH5, GH5S and GX9 were all developed at the same time. It's not like there was a meaningful difference in R&D costs. It's a tweaked GH5. Panny felt they could charge more for the GH5S by marketing it as a tool for more serious "filmmakers" (their word, not mine.)

 

[icarusfilm]

But why should they sell it for less? They have a market value. Also you are in a minority in the things you want a camera to do, the majority of people who buy a GH5 don’t care about any of the functionalities you care about. You want Panasonic to custom make a camera for you and sell it to you for 1k

The GH5, GH5S and GX9 were all developed at the same time. It's not like there was a meaningful difference in R&D costs. It's a tweaked GH5. Panny felt they could charge more for the GH5S by marketing it as a tool for more serious "filmmakers" (their word, not mine.)

 

[Thomas Smet]

The GH5, GH5S and GX9 were all developed at the same time. It's not like there was a meaningful difference in R&D costs. It's a tweaked GH5. Panny felt they could charge more for the GH5S by marketing it as a tool for more serious "filmmakers" (their word, not mine.)

Its an entirely different sensor, they brought back multi-aspect, managed a DSP with 14bit, and created the worlds first dual native ISO in a DSLR camera. I would call that bit more R&D vs the other cameras. Its not like they just took a chainsaw and sawed off the extra megapixels, slapped an S sticker on it and jacked up the cost. It may look the same on the outside, share the same name, and utilize the same formats and processing method but the guts are very much a different class. From a business and manufacturing perspective I just don't see how the GH5s could cost the same amount as the GH5. There are just too many internal hardware differences.

 

[Andrew Stone]

Whatever it is and will become (I'm interested to see), but thread titles like "game over" are ridiculous at best.

I think it is time the thread is renamed to something less incendiary, like "GH Series Cams Have Some Competition Now". Really tired of seeing this thread pop up in the New Posts section. Makes the forum appear amateur. We should have more self-respect here, in my view.

 

[Cary Knoop]

Soap operas discovered that long before gamers. I guess some people think they're cool too.

Do you realize that most soap operas in history were shot on film?

But even if they are shot in 60p/60i, what is the problem?

A 24p movie can't even do a decently speedy pan without stuttering or flickering.

Anyway, I think the future is going to 120p, but then again some will never agree after all some people still swear by vinyl......

There is another advantage of going to 120p, fiddling with ND filters is for all intents and purposes no longer necessary.

 

[Shirozina]

The point was speaking to bit depth and compression.

There was an assertion posited that bit depth and lower (better) compression only became relevant and useful in "badly exposed" footage.

That's just wrong.

If it wasn't then a "correctly" exposed 8 Bit image would be all anyone needed, as long as all the important information falls into those 8 bits.

But we all know that's just not the case.

I also allude to the fact that Blackmagic cameras generally offer 12 bit options. And just like we all notice and love the jump from 8 bit to 10 bit. It goes the same again when you go 10 bit to 12 bit.

This is what makes them so compelling for me. The codec options are nice too, but it's not just a 10 bit camera. It's also 12 bit....Switchable. Shot to shot. Internally recording, not externally complicated by extra crap (unless you want that)

We all agree that 8 bit is crap.

10 bit is better.

12 bit is more better again...

Why's that hard to understand ? Yes we need more media and fast media, yes we need better post. Maybe it's not for all who don't need that, but to argue it's not is wrong.

Like I said, you get it all for not very much if you buy both cameras for very little outlay, but pretending 10 bit "panny" processed NR'd and cooked, compressed is the same as less processed 10 bit / 12 bit.....

they're not as anyone who's graded and shot those files will know....the same way you see the differences between 8 bit and 10 bit.


JB

AFAIK the P4k shoots 10bit ProRes in a YCbCr format (the listed specs are ProRes 422 which is by definition limited to 10bit) and RAW in an RGB format at higher bit depths? If so you can't compare bit depth between YCbCr and RGB.
8bit is not 'crap' in a YCbCr format especially if it's captured in a low compression codec like ProRes such as can be done with an ext recorder on a lot of cameras. Most of the issues (banding) people have with 8bit are compression artefacts from low quality high compression internal codecs and 4.2.0 chroma subsampling.
10bit is better as you can push it harder and I have yet to break it so I can't see how 12 bit YCbCr would be any better (for me anyway). Also 10bit YCbCr will be generated from a 14bit sensor output so the Y should be pretty indistructable. Now RGB 8bit would be 'crap' for any grading even with a good codec and even RAW 10bit RGB would be borderline so I'd definatley want 12 bit or greater for that and sensibly / obviously this is what I understand BM offer.

 

[rsbush]

But even if they are shot in 60p/60i, what is the problem?

The problem for some people is that 60p/60i looks too realistic. Is there a problem with that?

There are very sound artistic reasons to take things out of the realm of strict realism.
Should every painter with the appropriate skill set, paint in a photo realistic style?

Do you realize that Tony Visconti and David Bowie were consciously taking advantage of the limitations of vinyl and less tracks to craft the sound they wanted? Clarity is not always the best choice just because it's possible.

 

[Cde.]

The problem for some people is that 60p/60i looks too realistic. Is there a problem with that?

There are very sound artistic reasons to take things out of the realm of strict realism.
Should every painter with the appropriate skill set, paint in a photo realistic style?

Do you realize that Tony Visconti and David Bowie were consciously taking advantage of the limitations of vinyl and less tracks to craft the sound they wanted? Clarity is not always the best choice just because it's possible.

It seems strange to take the artistic freedom line to argue against 60p, given that 24p is the default and the mere mention of shooting in an alternate framerate strikes horror into the hearts of cinephiles.

 

[joe12south]

The problem for some people is that 60p/60i looks too realistic. Is there a problem with that?

This. You shoot Angelina Jolie walking towards you @ 24 frames per second, and she moves like an angel. You shoot her @ 60 frames per second, and she moves like your wife.

I don't mind if a football game looks real, but I don't want my movies to look real. What is *not* recorded, what is implied, is filled-in by the brain, and that's a powerful creative tool.