GH4 'Lab Review Reveals 10bit Flaws in Vlog + FREE GH5 LUT'

Bern Caughey said:
How Good is the Panasonic GH5? Lab Review Reveals 10bit Flaws in Vlog + FREE GH5 LUT
by Sebastian Wöber

https://www.cinema5d.com/panasonic-gh5-lab-review-10-bit-flaws-vlog-free-gh5-lut/
Click to expand...

Their whole premise is flawed. Pre-production, pre-production, pre-production.... yet still test against finished products. That's amateur hour. If the tester thinks these are valid issues, take it up with Panasonic in private, and then if the issue is confirmed, we can talk. Otherwise it's click bait. And pretty bad at that.
 
For the record:
The hardware is final. Firmware 1.0 was supplied to us by Panasonic after having an open private discussion with them for the last few weeks about different issues.
The camera was given to us knowing we will conduct such a test.

Thank you.

Johnnie
 
It seems like cinema5D is making its reputation by destroying cameras as they are introduced, they did this with the Canon XC10. And we all know that the concerns were real but overstated, and that the camera had excellent utility. However before people discovered this it was another year of low sales.
 
It looks like we can put the 'the GH5 has a better dynamic range compared to the GH4' argument pretty much to rest:

dynamic-range-panasonic-gh5-2-640x400.jpg


10bit output is obviously no guarantee that it is actually 10 bit, a true 10bit resolution requires a minimum noise floor, if the GH5 does not meet that the 10 bit is nothing more than an 8 or 9 bit signal dithered to 10bits.
 
Last edited:
From my limited testing of other people's V-Log footage, it would seem that the GH4 adage to expose to the right may not be the best choice here. The last test I did rendered really beautiful images, with a single issue, again I think related to proper exposure. In no way terminal. I'd also suggest reading Barry's response in the "GH5 coming in 2017" thread.
 
dynamic-range-panasonic-gh5-2-640x400.jpg


It looks like the Cinema5D guys cut the GH5 dynamic range short by one step, as I can clearly see a difference on the edge of the last step and the darker step that follows it.
 
TheDingo said:
dynamic-range-panasonic-gh5-2-640x400.jpg


It looks like the Cinema5D guys cut the GH5 dynamic range short by one step, as I can clearly see a difference on the edge of the last step and the darker step that follows it.
Click to expand...

In the review, they said they didn't think those stops were usable, as they were too noisy.
 
Batutta said:
In the review, they said they didn't think those stops were usable, as they were too noisy.
Click to expand...

Which may have everything to do with not knowing how to properly shoot with the camera.

i.e. Most GHx shooters turn in-camera NR to it's lowest setting and then use NR profiles in post to clean up the image.

I don't know if I buy what they are saying when it comes the actual DR of the GH5.
 
Did anybody on here honestly expect 150mbps 4:2:2 10bit H264 to look as good as external ProRes422 HQ? While the color space enhancements are there with internal 10bit the encoder is still a H264 based encoder that needs to group similar colors together to get the video down to only 150mbps.

To 99% of the GH5 users the internal 10bit format will be phenomenal and they will fall in love with it. If a colorist will be touching any of the material however then I have always highly recommended using an external recorder and a format like ProRes422 HQ.

This article is ridiculous. It is really going out of its way to try to find a flaw with the GH5 and point out that it may not be as good as a camera that costs 4x as much. Does anybody here actually expect the GH5 to beat all of these cameras? I love my GH4 but I know what it is and what it isn't and don't sit here and pretend it is bigger than it actually is. Of course the internal format isn't visually perfect with V-log. It is still a extremely highly compressed format using the estimation methods of an H264 encoder. You can optimize that until you are blue in the face but that is still 1/5th the size of ProRes422 HQ and even that is highly compressed compared to uncompressed. That 150mbps is 1/27th the size of UHD uncompressed. That is a lot of tossed out data. The fact that it looks as good as it does at 1/27th the size is exceptionally impressive. Of course there are color artifacts there. If you want the minimal amount of V-log color artifacts you record ProRes422 HQ which is a bit under 1/6th the size of uncompressed. While it may not be seen with the naked eye easily that extra data is there for grading.

It would have been nice to see Cinema5D actually test the GH5 with external recording since that opens up even more quality options. If a film maker is going to really get down and dirty with that level of pixel peeping quality concerns I would ask why on earth are they recording internal 150mbps when they have a perfectly good and affordably set of solutions for external ProRes422 HQ?
 
philiplipetz,

No one is trying to "make a reputation by destroying cameras as they are introduced". PR and marketing became an important tool to the respected companies in our industry and while occasionally the end user might find him/herself overwhelmed with that information, we knowingly decided to take the unpopular role of doing those lab tests (along side our user reviews), and by using a constant methodology put on the table how a camera behaves. The routine is similar. First we are being accused for "what ever", then the camera gets into the market and customers starts to see its shortcomings like we previously reported.

In this particular case, there was/is constant communication with the manufacturer. In fact, this lab test was scheduled for 2 weeks ago but we delayed it until getting the latest firmware. It is also important to highlight that most if not all manufacturers whom we have been in contact with, are using those lab test to improve their products.

There is much more to write but as the FUJIFILM GFX, X-T20 and Canon 700 are on our table for testing, I'll keep it short for now.


Thank you!

Johnnie
 
I think C5D makes the best out of testing things. Any test will get questioned but as they build a library of tests which can be used to compare different cameras with a constant testing formula one can at least see how things compare.

Any popular camera with killer features soon to be released isn't to welcome to criticize and buyers will complain. Because who wants to admit their new and shiny camera has flaws?
 
Thomas you're right on the money. The notion of taking this $2000 camera with the specs that you mention above, using pre-production software,and comparing it to a $27,000 camera is absurd on the face of it. I have one on order and I was not comparing it to any of those cameras when I decided to buy it. I was comparing it to purchasing against upgrading my Canon 5D Mark III with a mark iv. ( interesting to note that the website that takes its name from the Canon 5D did not even think to test that against it )additionally if they wanted to compare it's and that capability they should've looked at other cameras perhaps camcorders in the similar price range. that they took the Fujitsu and ran it external is another odd decision. Or as you suggest they should've gone External as well as internal. I appreciated the diligence with which they did they test but you might as well compare a Suburu to a Maserati because they have four wheels. frankly I am very unlikely to ever click on a cinema five D test ever again,it was a waste of my time. they have really shown themselves to be less than reliable in putting tests like this together and expecting us to care about them. it seems as if it was a rush to judgment, in order to get advertising revenue .
 
Last edited:
The inclusion of the Canon C700 in this lab test is only for demonstration purposes so people can see how 10bit should have been looked like, so of course there is no a direct competition between the 2 cameras.

Thank you.

Johnnie
 
Geez, some are taking it very personally...
IMHO it's a good thing they compare those cameras - if anything it shows how GOOD the GH5 is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top