GH4 Panasonic GH5 coming in 2017

Masnart,

AF is great for individual operators in gimbal circumstances, etc.

High ISO is great when lights aren't available or are impractical (I have a full light kit, which does not get setup before the bridge and groom cut the cake, or around the live tribe gathering around a fire in the foothills of the Himalyas that I'm shooting in early april, etc.)

Internal stabilizer isn't a professional issue or not, it's an ultra lightweight tool that allows for creative freedom. I have no less than 7 stabilization devices and I am thoroughly pleased with the 5 axis IBIS for what it can do for my creaitve options and workflow

Lattitude has many aesthetic advantages past screwing up, both in the look of a perfectly exposed image and in the options for docu/live event

Further, all of these things perfectly dovetail with Panasonic's self proclaimed target market, as is made evident in literally the first page of their brochure.

To be fair, you absolutely describe some users and in that sense I completely agree. But how is that relevant to the professionals here?

You sound like a smart guy and I think you have a lot to add, but I would might suggest that unless you've read through the last 190 pages you are reciting things that have been beaten to death in a far more intellectual and constructive manner, with your points already addressed numerous times over. I say this because I'd love to see you add to the discussion instead of having us retread!

Regarding the Sony cameras, while I have made my choice with Panasonic, I do think Sony makes some great and highly compelling cameras despite their issues (which I feel are often overstated, much in the same way the GHx series cameras issues are often overstated).
 
My argument was not that features aren't useful. Camera features let you do more with less, but you if you expect someone to pay you for your work, you better be good at your craft. I wouldn't use auto exposure, i wouldn't use in-camera audio as final, i wouldn't trust auto-focus to know what I want to be in focus. Some of those features work in some applications, but when they don't, what do you do? I know you can't always have a large crew for every project, but I shape my creative for production based upon what I can and can't accomplish.
 
When you are in a run and gun situation, it's not about how masterful you are in the art of filmmaking, its about getting the shot. I'll take all the automatic tools I can get under certain circumstances. If there were a drone that ran silently for a couple of hours that had a 5x zoom on it with auto everything, oh what a world it would be to shoot events. Five or 10 of those would really be nice.
 
Oh I am not in love with Sony and leaning towards the GH5 for many many reasons. I am on the fence on low light and want to see more test, I am one man band and the a6500 with all it's warts is really good here on a gimbal.
Dynamic range is another big one as well. I love the touch focus points on the GH5 I love you can lock in shutter angle, handling and 5 axis is amazing. I have an old HMC 150 I still use at some events. I have been pleased
with the quality of video I can get out of the Sony RX100 IV like here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHlhTCGtOnc I own a EM1 II so already have the Olympus 12 40Pro which I think is fully functional AF wise on the GH5.
Inputs and advice welcome. I shoot a lot of stock video I am not concerned with audio as I have other cameras for that work.
 
TheDingo said:
Not exactly sure I understand where you are coming from ???

Yes, Full Frame lenses can be adapted to work with almost any camera, and if you work with multiple formats that might be a key feature when you buy lenses.

I use eight Nikon AI-S lenses with my GH4 camera because they are softer and lower contrast than any of the Micro 4/3 lenses I've used. But they are also pretty useless when it comes to shooting wide-angle with my GH4, so I have no choice but to use a Micro 4/3 lens if I need a 12mm f/1.4 lens that is sharp wide open.

Being sharp at full aperture is something that many of the better Micro 4/3 lenses feature, and something that is hard to find when shooting with Full Frame lenses. Many of the FF telephoto lenses can do this, but few of the FF "normal" or wide-angle lenses perform well at maximum aperture. ( the Sigma ART lenses and the Zeiss OTUS lenses are exceptions )

I also use the Panasonic 12-35mm f/2.8 zoom quite a bit because of the convenience of it's focal length range. It's a very sharp lens that performs well at f/2.8. It doesn't have the visual aesthetic of my Nikon lenses, but I know how to make this lens work.

At some point I will buy the Olympus 7-14mm f/2.8 zoom for it's ultra-wide focal length range, as there's not much competition when you need to shoot at these focal lengths.
Click to expand...

Greg_E said:
I'm sure the people at Veydra would disagree about the quality of m43 mount lenses. http://www.veydra.com/

I see they also have E mount now, not sure when that happened.
Click to expand...

filmguy123 said:
There's nothing wrong with native M43 lenses. Voigtlander makes awesome native M43 lenses. So does Leica.

Only talking about quality of glass and optics and that is irrespective of the lens mount option. Panasonic & Olympus make great lenses too but many of their lenses prioritize sharpness over things that some high end glass manufacturers have traditionally priortized, or use process that imbue a certain aesthetic character too. These also tend to be more expensive lenses (zeiss, leica, voigtlander, etc.)
Click to expand...



You’re asking me where I am coming from?

Well, I am from the World in which seems somnabuliclyidiotic to spend 500$ on a lens that would be a closest equivalent of competitor’s products that cost half as much.
(lumix 25mm 1.4 vs EF/F 50mm 1.4) and yet not been able to use that lens on NO OTHER system!?!?!?!!?!

I guess there is nothing wrong with m43 optics…How do I know?

I mean how would any of us know since we are purposely paralyzed as users to actually test on our own and see the quality of lumix optic and OPTICS ONLY, how really good they are, without software tweaks and enhancements of olypaniacal camera bodies namely, sharpness and aberrations fields.Of course since m43 optics can not be used on any other system that potentially does use software to make up for lens downfalls, there is no way we can know for sure how the actual lens quality really is.

So I guess its not really problem wth lumix optics but with lumix idoitics!


You know, like the one when you are asked to invest huge chunks of cash in native lenses yet without offering you a possibility, if you wish on day, to eventually been ably to use them on a NATIVE manufacturer’s PRO camera system.

EVER!

Because such product DOES NOT EXIST.
:(


It’s not like when you buy a Canon EF kit lens along with t6i and down the road if you are still driving, you can actually buy C700 and use the - same freaking kit lens?!?!?!?!?!
Well, sorry Pedro - no such luck with m43.

Just to remind you, that no manufacturer be it pan-oly-jvc-fuji, does not have a PRO m43 CAMERA BODY and none of them considers G/X/GH m43 lines to be a PRO!
For them these are the prosumer systems at best. …At least thats what you can hear penny representatives tell you during industry conferences and shows when you asked them why they cripple pro features in a GH line ?!
“Well Sir, GH4 is not really a pro camera…” I’ve been told more then once by their officials….


So basally, if I like videographing birds, I am expected to pay a price of a used car, for a super tele lens that I can combine with a TOY camera body and be happy with dysfunctional af/stabilisation functions that will never give me a price/performance ratio of a thirds party EF/F/m32 optics on a same body…

But we should no worry, because the future firmware in fall of 2019 might fix that issue…if anybody still will be using m43 system then.

I mean that’s a philosophy that even LEICA braintrust would find to be market inefficient:)
At least Leica does their best to maintain backward lens-body compatibility since they future cameras have such a retro features the there is no advance in them at all…

GH5 specs made me wanna gain back my nikon D lenses kit that I sold towards the beginnings of 21 century!
You remember these right? The ones that you can use on old manual Nikon bodies if you are still a film perv, but also you can mount them on native NIKON F mount bodies plus EOS bodies, plus Red, ARRI, Sony, BM, well even in m43 bodies if you wish…and if you are screwed to own one…..


Now I will not address the issue of lumix AF lenses been used for video since that would make my post too long ;)

But lets just briefly mention that the only bigger idiot than the one who’s proposing such practice is the one who acctualy adopts it!
Using lumix AF lenses for video shooting.\?!?!?!???!
WHROOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG!!!!!

First,
because AF in these situations just doesn’t work and
Second,
because manual focus in these situation doesn’t work - EITHER!!!

AAMAF, the second one is probably invented as a torture method and instant karma punishment for people who try to do a honorable job expected from a a proper camera user: Keep their subject in focus, continuously through the whole take!
 
radtex said:
Official GH5 manual now online: https://eww.pavc.panasonic.co.jp/dscoi/DC-GH5/EG_EC_EF_EB/DC-GH5_DVQP1121ZA_eng.pdf
Click to expand...

Nice to see the 6k photo mode officially confirm 5184 pixels wide when shooting 3:2 aspect ratio. While not exactly 6k pixels wide it is important to keep in mind the brand new Alexa 65 which is their new 65mm 6k cinema camera shoots a 16x9 mode that is 5120 pixels wide vs the open gate which uses 6560 pixels wide. Not sure why they crop so much in 16x9 mode but they do. Since they do that means it will become a Hollywood standard and therefore the GH5 6k mode can be considered 6k even though it isn't really 6k pixels.

One interesting use of the 6k photo mode would be to shoot 3:2 for 5184x3456 and crop in post to 5184x2916 for a 16x9 5k video from the GH5. You could also use that 5k for reframing, motion tracking and cropping down to 4k for extra room to play with. This is how movies like Ender's Game made use of 5k cameras in post production. They shot 5k and scaled to 2.5k for all post work which was delivered as 2k. The extra .5k was used for effects tracking and reframing.

Yet another potential interesting use of the new GH5. Too bad it is 30p only.
 
Maest said:
You’re asking me where I am coming from?

Well, I am from the World in which seems somnabuliclyidiotic to spend 500$ on a lens that would be a closest equivalent of competitor’s products that cost half as much.
(lumix 25mm 1.4 vs EF/F 50mm 1.4) and yet not been able to use that lens on NO OTHER system!?!?!?!!?!

I guess there is nothing wrong with m43 optics…How do I know?

I mean how would any of us know since we are purposely paralyzed as users to actually test on our own and see the quality of lumix optic and OPTICS ONLY, how really good they are, without software tweaks and enhancements of olypaniacal camera bodies namely, sharpness and aberrations fields.Of course since m43 optics can not be used on any other system that potentially does use software to make up for lens downfalls, there is no way we can know for sure how the actual lens quality really is.

So I guess its not really problem wth lumix optics but with lumix idoitics!


You know, like the one when you are asked to invest huge chunks of cash in native lenses yet without offering you a possibility, if you wish on day, to eventually been ably to use them on a NATIVE manufacturer’s PRO camera system.

EVER!

Because such product DOES NOT EXIST.
:(


It’s not like when you buy a Canon EF kit lens along with t6i and down the road if you are still driving, you can actually buy C700 and use the - same freaking kit lens?!?!?!?!?!
Well, sorry Pedro - no such luck with m43.

Just to remind you, that no manufacturer be it pan-oly-jvc-fuji, does not have a PRO m43 CAMERA BODY and none of them considers G/X/GH m43 lines to be a PRO!
For them these are the prosumer systems at best. …At least thats what you can hear penny representatives tell you during industry conferences and shows when you asked them why they cripple pro features in a GH line ?!
“Well Sir, GH4 is not really a pro camera…” I’ve been told more then once by their officials….


So basally, if I like videographing birds, I am expected to pay a price of a used car, for a super tele lens that I can combine with a TOY camera body and be happy with dysfunctional af/stabilisation functions that will never give me a price/performance ratio of a thirds party EF/F/m32 optics on a same body…

But we should no worry, because the future firmware in fall of 2019 might fix that issue…if anybody still will be using m43 system then.

I mean that’s a philosophy that even LEICA braintrust would find to be market inefficient:)
At least Leica does their best to maintain backward lens-body compatibility since they future cameras have such a retro features the there is no advance in them at all…

GH5 specs made me wanna gain back my nikon D lenses kit that I sold towards the beginnings of 21 century!
You remember these right? The ones that you can use on old manual Nikon bodies if you are still a film perv, but also you can mount them on native NIKON F mount bodies plus EOS bodies, plus Red, ARRI, Sony, BM, well even in m43 bodies if you wish…and if you are screwed to own one…..


Now I will not address the issue of lumix AF lenses been used for video since that would make my post too long ;)

But lets just briefly mention that the only bigger idiot than the one who’s proposing such practice is the one who acctualy adopts it!
Using lumix AF lenses for video shooting.\?!?!?!???!
WHROOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG!!!!!

First,
because AF in these situations just doesn’t work and
Second,
because manual focus in these situation doesn’t work - EITHER!!!

AAMAF, the second one is probably invented as a torture method and instant karma punishment for people who try to do a honorable job expected from a a proper camera user: Keep their subject in focus, continuously through the whole take!
Click to expand...

Sure there is. The BMD Pocket camera has a m43 lens mount with no electronic enhancement. At least I don't think there is any electronic enhancement on that camera.
 
A collage of Lumix GH5 6KPhoto mode 30p shots that you'd normally extrapolate 4:3 (or 3:2) aspect 18.7Mb JPG files from. But lets keep it rolling and see what the visual quality and motion looks like after being transcoded from HEVC h265 to h264 using DaVinci Resolve 12.5 Studio. Is it a good alternative to recording in normal 4K?

FYI The 4:3 4992x3744 pixel files are scaled down 0.77 to fit the vertical edges UHD (16:9). Subsequently, you can tilt up/down/pan a HD file out of the larger crop. :-)

Actually I'm loving the quality with its deep contrast crushed blacks..! You can record in all profiles bar Vlog and Rec709L so CineLike D, natural or Standard is what Ive done here. You get audio (but Ive removed it) and the files are packaged in a HEVC 4:2:0 10-bit wrapper at a data rate of nearly 200Mbps. You can kind double that data rate (because h265 can be same quality as h264 at only half the data size) you're in effect getting 400Mbps Long GOP equivalent! Loving the GH5 ;-)

Lenses: 12-60mm Lecia/Pana, Anamorphot SLR Magic 35mm, Voighlander 25mm f0.95 night stuff, Shard building Panasonic 7-14mm v1, In tight Human faces shot on Sigma 50mm Art. Standard profile -3s
Click to expand...
 
Maest said:
I am from the World in which seems somnabuliclyidiotic to spend 500$ on a lens that would be a closest equivalent of competitor’s products that cost half as much. (lumix 25mm 1.4 vs EF/F 50mm 1.4)
Click to expand...

From a performance perspective the Lumix 25mm f/1.4 is a MUCH better lens than the Canon 50mm f/1.4, and that's why the Lumix lens costs more. It's a better lens.

The Lumix lens is sharp at f/1.4, where the Canon lens has all the typical problems of the Zeiss 50mm planar lens design, where it's very SOFT at f/1.4 and it has TONS of coma at f/1.4.

So the Lumix 25mm f/1.4 performs great at f/1.4, and the Canon lens has to be stopped down 1 to 2 F-stops to achieve similar results.

I've owned both lenses and the Canon lens sucks when used at f/1.4

Imaging Resource.com Lumix 25mm f/1.4 Review

Imaging Resource.com Canon 50mm f/1.4 Review
 
Reading the manual section on recording format, size, & frame rates (starts p. 162) It looks like the only way to get FHD/1080p 4:2:2 10 bit is to record 4k and downrez in post?
 
TheDingo said:
From a performance perspective the Lumix 25mm f/1.4 is a MUCH better lens than the Canon 50mm f/1.4, and that's why the Lumix lens costs more. It's a better lens.

The Lumix lens is sharp at f/1.4, where the Canon lens has all the typical problems of the Zeiss 50mm planar lens design, where it's very SOFT at f/1.4 and it has TONS of coma at f/1.4.

So the Lumix 25mm f/1.4 performs great at f/1.4, and the Canon lens has to be stopped down 1 to 2 F-stops to achieve similar results.

I've owned both lenses and the Canon lens sucks when used at f/1.4

Imaging Resource.com Lumix 25mm f/1.4 Review

Imaging Resource.com Canon 50mm f/1.4 Review
Click to expand...

I totally agree, the Lumix 25mm is clearly superior in center and corners at 1.4. And the canon is still softer in corners til about F4.
 
Steve Ogden said:
Reading the manual section on recording format, size, & frame rates (starts p. 162) It looks like the only way to get FHD/1080p 4:2:2 10 bit is to record 4k and downrez in post?
Click to expand...

Hmmm, in a past feature list release was this: "ALL-I (Intra) 10bit 422 1080p at 200 Mbps – free firmware update later in year" AND I see no mention in this manual of Anamorphic mode, which is also a later update. So perhaps version1 of the manual is not including some updates features yet???
 
On page 13 of the manual it says "If you shake the camera while it is turned off, its sensors may move or a rattling sound may be heard. The sound is caused by the In-Body Image Stabililizer, and this is not a malfunction." Looks like we're about to have some of those good old DVX100 posts about "what's that rattle?" Probably ok to recycle those DVX100 stories. . . :Drogar-BigGrin(DBG)
 
Yes, the GH5 autofocus does not look very usable.Has been said previously,in many curcumstances i hold my hands up on a lot of the type of filming i do i have to use AF, my manualy focused film would be worse than leaving it to the camera,so will the AF be better than the poor GH4 AF.
 
The manual confirms a 4K ETC mode with a 1.4X crop to a 1:1 image. So the 12-35 morphs to 50 long and won't come up too short so often. And stretches my Canon 100-400 to 1120mm EFL. Nice!
 
flinty said:
Yes, the GH5 autofocus does not look very usable.Has been said previously,in many curcumstances i hold my hands up on a lot of the type of filming i do i have to use AF, my manualy focused film would be worse than leaving it to the camera,so will the AF be better than the poor GH4 AF.
Click to expand...

To those of you complaining about the autofocus -- on the DVX200, UX180 and UX90, there are two menu items for programming the autofocus speed & sensitivity. You can make the autofocus perform exactly like you want. I would not let some random internet test performed by who knows who, be the determining factor, until I had a chance to read the manual and see if the GH5 includes similar capability. It's entirely possible that the GH5 might have autofocus that slays other cameras, when programmed properly for your situation. Or not; that may be a feature that's only implemented on the pro cameras. But I certainly wouldn't make any decision yet based on preliminary, early tests by people who almost by definition cannot know what the camera is truly capable of because they've only had their hands on it for such a limited time, right?
 
Peter Berry said:
The manual confirms a 4K ETC mode with a 1.4X crop to a 1:1 image. So the 12-35 morphs to 50 long and won't come up too short so often. And stretches my Canon 100-400 to 1120mm EFL. Nice!
Click to expand...
So the manual is out? I hadn't looked, so -- my prior comment may be premature/unnecessary.

However, this is a great feature! Glad to hear it. I always liked having 1080/720 ETC on my GH2...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top