GH4 Panasonic GH5 coming in 2017

Jaime Valles said:
If the GH5 does actually end up shooting in 6K resolution (like some rumors have been suggesting recently) you woudn't be able to record in 6K externally, right? You'd have to use internal recording to get the full resolution image, because all these recorders from Atomos & VideoDevices record in 4K...
Click to expand...
If it's like A6300, it'll use 20 MPX to produce a 4K signal inside the camera. True 422 is 17.6 MPX, so this will be slightly better (provided everything else is equal). Hypothetically, they should also offer variable aspects, since GH4 does it already. Matt Frazier (their US rep) was at the NAB showing GH4 with the new SLR anamorphics, so GH5 should also have it.

combatentropy said:
... My current favorite is Cineform RAW: 3.5:1 compression, visually lossless, and an open standard (SMPTE VC-5)...
Click to expand...
Now, that'd be a step up. This is the basic spec sheet for Cineform Raw and it's actually doable with the SD (V60 and V90) cards in 4K.

https://cineform.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/206528266-How-big-are-CineForm-files-

I doubt they'll do it though.
 
combatentropy said:
Macro blocking is an artifact of the discrete cosine transfer. The following codecs all use the discrete cosine transfer: JPEG, MPEG 1, MPEG 2, MPEG 4, DV, DNxHD, and ProRes. Macro blocking happens when you starve the discrete cosine transfer and give it too few bits to do an image justice. Why doesn't ProRes suffer macro blocking? Because it's fed enough bits.

MPEG-4 came out after ProRes and has been a formidable codec to beat. Does anyone ever wonder what happened to JPEG2000, with its cool, wavelet-based compression? Tests found that MPEG-4 still beat it.



Yes, we can. AVC-Intra is 100 or 200 Mbps, intraframe-only, and at 200 Mbps is visually lossless.




AVC-Intra is a frame-by-frame format.


I'm not saying cameras should necessarily go to AVC-Intra --- although that would be sweet. My current favorite is Cineform RAW: 3.5:1 compression, visually lossless, and an open standard (SMPTE VC-5).
Click to expand...

AVC-Intra may be intra but it also uses motion prediction to create a residual image to attempt to only use the part of the frame that changes. This is one of the reasons why it can use a much lower data rate than other intra formats. This method of calculating a difference between two frames is vastly superior to how IPB compression works but it is still performing a difference calculation to determine how much of the image to toss out.

AVC-Intra is an impressive format but I'm not sure I would call it visually lossless. Any DCT codec is visually lossy even ProRes4444 XQ. Compression is compression and is the act of throwing out information to make the file smaller. Some compression works better than others but it's all compression in the end. The only true visually lossless is uncompressed and a few formats like DNG which compresses images in a similar way to how zip compresses files we send over the internet. Maybe in terms of how people perceive images one could use the subjective term visually lossless but that doesn't mean it is visually lossless for everybody. I have worked with uncompressed and I can tell the difference between H264, ProRes, AVC-Intra and Uncompressed.

Besides I consider all this talk of AVC-Intra to be a moot point. This is a consumer grade DSLR we are talking about here. The DVX200 didn't even get AVC-Intra and many other professional level Panasonic video cameras don't even get AVC-Intra so why would a GH5? I think we need to be a little bit more realistic about the intended market for the GH cameras. Just because some of us use the GH4 for high end production work doesn't mean that is the intended market. We can all say the GH5 should have ProRes or AVC-Intra but the history and reality of these cameras tells us otherwise. Most of us have been asking for a AVC-Intra type format as the standard since the dawn of DV and we are still waiting for it.

It is also about building a device that works for many different markets. Do photographers need AVC-Intra? Should they have to pay for a format that only a handful of people would actually benefit from? How many video professionals actually need AVC-Intra? We already have a large amount of people that can't really tell the difference between 4k material from the GH4 captured via a Shogun or internal at 100mbps. To a large percentage of GH4 users they have a hard tell really seeing a difference. Should they have to pay for a higher end format just because some of us don't want to mess around with an extra piece of gear?

H264 represents a good balance between file size, quality, economics and ease of use. All things that make sense in a consumer or even professional camera to work well for just about everybody. If you really do need something higher the GH4 gave us that option to basically go as high as broadcast specs allow. The only thing really better than uncompressed 10bit 4:2:2 4k is raw.
 
Thomas Smet said:
If the DVX200 which is a more professional aligned product for Panasonic didn't get AVC-Intra why on earth would a consumer stills DSLR get it?
Click to expand...

Exactly my point. To touch on someone's point earlier, I think people forget that we may not necessarily be our gear's target audience. If someone is doing high end production on a GH4, more power to them. I think it's awesome, and speaks to their ability to get high production values out of what was originally about a $1,700 camera. But the overwhelming bulk of folks using the GH4 are not them. :)
 
Thomas Smet said:
AVC-Intra may be intra but it also uses motion prediction to create a residual image to attempt to only use the part of the frame that changes. This is one of the reasons why it can use a much lower data rate
Click to expand...

How is 200 "much lower" than 220?

To answer your question: if the golden frame differs much from the current frame, it puts more bits into it. Difference compression can be not only visually lossless but even mathematically. To wit, Git.

The DVX200 didn't even get AVC-Intra
Click to expand...

and yet the PX270 did.
 
The PX is an "AJ" classification of camera while the DVX is an "AG" classification. The AJ is the broadcast group, so it has the best stuff included. This highlights what I have wanted all along, an AJ-PX430 with a brighter lens and 10bit codecs.
 
combatentropy said:
How is 200 "much lower" than 220?

To answer your question: if the golden frame differs much from the current frame, it puts more bits into it. Difference compression can be not only visually lossless but even mathematically. To wit, Git.



and yet the PX270 did.
Click to expand...

The PX270 is a HD camera that costs over $5,500.00 so yeah that is a rather high price point for a 1/3" HD camera which puts it in a different class. The DVX200 is a 4k camera with a 4/3" sensor. Kind of an apples vs oranges comparison there. A 4k camera with AVC-Ultra would likely cost a heck of a lot more than the PX270 and DVX200 combined. In fact as far as I can tell the Varicam LT is the cheapest camera that can actually record AVC-Ultra 4k and that starts over $16,000.00. So why exactly should a $1,700 GH5 get AVC-Ultra?

Who said anything about 200mbps vs 220mbps? We are talking 4k here since we are talking about the GH4 and GH5. AVC-Ultra 4k for 24p is around 320mbps vs 750 mbps for ProRes HQ and 2.1Gbps for uncompressed. I'm sorry but reducing 2.1Gbps to 320mbps is going to have a loss no matter how much you want to believe in the Panasonic marketing literature for AVC-Ultra. It's an exceptionally good looking format but it is lossy. I'm also not saying I wouldn't embrace the format but really the format doesn't offer anything over what ProRes422 HQ 4k can give us with an external recorder. Sure the files are larger but SSD media is considerably cheaper and easier to get than express p2 media. Like $100.00 vs $1,150.00. With media 1/10th the cost who cares if the files are twice as large?

If you have a scientific test that compares AVC-Ultra 4k to ProRes422 HQ, normal and LT levels I would love to see it.

Again there is really zero point to this conversation since a camera like the GH5 will likely never get AVC-Ultra. I'm sorry if you somehow really think there is a chance it could happen.
 
Mike Harvey said:
Exactly my point. To touch on someone's point earlier, I think people forget that we may not necessarily be our gear's target audience. If someone is doing high end production on a GH4, more power to them. I think it's awesome, and speaks to their ability to get high production values out of what was originally about a $1,700 camera. But the overwhelming bulk of folks using the GH4 are not them. :)
Click to expand...
But, IMO, that's not the point (though, you're right, technically speaking).

If they're going to price it in the $1,500-$1,800 range, they'll need more than a "consumer" codec, since A6300 already does a similar 100 Mbps rate but at a much lower price point and with a greater dynamic range and a larger sensor. And GH5 will come out 9-12 months after A6300.

Additionally, the non-professionals have scooped up plenty of BMD Pocket Cams, which offered 1080p CinemaDNG Raw. The Pocket Cam, arguably the best product BMD ever put out, did this upon its introduction over two years ago at $1,000. The Magic Lantern 5D MKII Raw hack has been around for two years as well. The BMD Cinema Camera, selling for $2,000, has had a 2.5K 12-bit CinemaDNG Raw built into it as far back as three years ago.

Add'em up and, should GH5 come with some sort of a Raw capability, it wouldn't be even close to precedent setting.
 
Who said anything about 200mbps vs 220mbps?
Click to expand...

AVC-Intra is a HD codec that can go 100 or 200.
The corresponding ProRes setting is 220.

All I'm saying is that you seemed to be saying that MPEG-4 will always be worse than ProRes. But if you spend the same number of bits, MPEG-4 will be at least as good. It's just more efficient codec, even the intra-frame only versions.


Thomas Smet said:
The PX270 is a HD camera that costs over $5,500.00 so yeah that is a rather high price point for a 1/3" HD camera which puts it in a different class. The DVX200 is a 4k camera with a 4/3" sensor. Kind of an apples vs oranges comparison there. A 4k camera with AVC-Ultra would likely cost a heck of a lot more than the PX270 and DVX200 combined. In fact as far as I can tell the Varicam LT is the cheapest camera that can actually record AVC-Ultra 4k and that starts over $16,000.00. So why exactly should a $1,700 GH5 get AVC-Ultra? . . . Again there is really zero point to this conversation since a camera like the GH5 will likely never get AVC-Ultra. I'm sorry if you somehow really think there is a chance it could happen.
Click to expand...

A camera can have whatever codec the manufacturer is willing to put into it. The parts cost in the single to double digits. The reason they don't is artificial tiering.

By the way, happy 100th birthday a day late to Claude Shannon.
 
Last edited:
combatentropy said:
AVC-Intra is a HD codec that can go 100 or 200.
The corresponding ProRes setting is 220.

All I'm saying is that you seemed to be saying that MPEG-4 will always be worse than ProRes. But if you spend the same number of bits, MPEG-4 will be at least as good. It's just more efficient codec, even the intra-frame only versions.




A camera can have whatever codec the manufacturer is willing to put into it. The parts cost in the single to double digits. The reason they don't is artificial tiering.

By the way, happy 100th birthday a day late to Claude Shannon.
Click to expand...

It is that Tiering I am talking about however. A lot of things in products are actually pretty cheap. All of apple's products are made with cheap parts. The point is that we have to look at the history of Panasonic and they tend to only give certain formats to certain customers. There is zero history or policy that indicates there is even a remote chance we would ever see AVC-Ultra in a GH5. I wish that were not the case but I'm just being a realist here.

We are actually talking about AVC-Ultra here which Panasonic has expanded to support 4k. As far as I can tell the only cameras that support 4k AVC-Ultra are the Varicam cameras. While it might be nice for some people to see AVC-Intra for HD support in the camera I would think most would expect some level of 4k recording support for AVC-Ultra. AVC-Intra was the 50mbps and 100mbps version created in 2007. AVC-Ultra is the new version that goes up to 200mbps for HD and 320mbps for 24p 4k. I personally have not seen AVC-Ultra 4k yet.

I think AVC-Ultra is a stunning format and would happily use it and embrace it if it was an option for us. I just happen to know it never will be an option for us and so the next best thing is ProRes for me. Since I am used to ProRes and the quality it delivers and that it is used in a lot of cinema workflows as an alternative recording format (BMD and Arri as an example) it makes sense to me as a format. I realize not everybody likes ProRes but it's a solid format. It isn't the best but it is well supported and embraced in the industry. The Varicam LT even records to ProRes as an option.
 
DLD said:
But, IMO, that's not the point (though, you're right, technically speaking).

If they're going to price it in the $1,500-$1,800 range, they'll need more than a "consumer" codec, since A6300 already does a similar 100 Mbps rate but at a much lower price point and with a greater dynamic range and a larger sensor. And GH5 will come out 9-12 months after A6300.

Additionally, the non-professionals have scooped up plenty of BMD Pocket Cams, which offered 1080p CinemaDNG Raw. The Pocket Cam, arguably the best product BMD ever put out, did this upon its introduction over two years ago at $1,000. The Magic Lantern 5D MKII Raw hack has been around for two years as well. The BMD Cinema Camera, selling for $2,000, has had a 2.5K 12-bit CinemaDNG Raw built into it as far back as three years ago.

Add'em up and, should GH5 come with some sort of a Raw capability, it wouldn't be even close to precedent setting.
Click to expand...

I've been using a producer's A6300 a lot lately. It does take a pretty dang good image for a sub-$1,000 camera. Larger sensor and better dynamic range be darned... it is also absolutely one of the must frustrating cameras I have ever used, precisely because of the sacrifices that had to be made to get it under $1k USD. I would gladly pay the original street price of the GH4 all over again for a much easier and more pro camera with a smaller sensor if I was buying today and my options were the GH4 and A6300. The producer even said that while it's a great camera for what it is, he only bought it as a stop-gap until he's personally more competent as a shooter to justify moving to something like the A7ii.
 
Mike Harvey said:
... The producer even said that while it's a great camera for what it is, he only bought it as a stop-gap until he's personally more competent as a shooter to justify moving to something like the A7ii.
Click to expand...
Or A7III. Or A7SII. Or A7RII. Or III.

Which makes me think that, by the end of 2016, the A7RII/SII prices should begin to move downward. Right now, Sony has no competition in that sector. 5D MKIV may change that. Or it may not. (fence sitting can be an enjoyable experience ... or not)
 
Sony sensor plant may be shut down through May due to the earthquake, causing a delay in the production of cameras that outsource their parts from Sony (no data if Sony makes sensors for own lines there but they might for their bridge/RX line). The effected OEM are - supposedly - those with MFT and 1" models, i.e., Olympus, Panasonic and Canon.
 
I imagine this will be part of the GH5... Build in slider trick is pretty impressive little trick especially in the handheld shots. Be nice if they add a few additional speed options.
 
Harry Pallenberg said:
I imagine this will be part of the GH5... Build in slider trick is pretty impressive little trick especially in the handheld shots.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's a neat trick. I was thinking that you might be able to fake normal slider parallax shift if you shot your subject on a green screen and subtly shift the alpha'd background.
 
DLD said:
Sony sensor plant may be shut down through May due to the earthquake, causing a delay in the production of cameras that outsource their parts from Sony (no data if Sony makes sensors for own lines there but they might for their bridge/RX line). The effected OEM are - supposedly - those with MFT and 1" models, i.e., Olympus, Panasonic and Canon.
Click to expand...
The earthquake effected plants are due to resume production by next week or the week after that but Sony's delaying shipments of their own A68 by two+ months. Presuming GH5 will have a Sony made sensor ...
 
I still don't think Panasonic is ready to produce a GH5, I don't think they would have given the GH4R and Vlog upgrade if they had a new camera coming in the very near future. I'm guessing more likely to see it in (early?) 2017.
 
Greg_E said:
I still don't think Panasonic is ready to produce a GH5, I don't think they would have given the GH4R and Vlog upgrade if they had a new camera coming in the very near future. I'm guessing more likely to see it in (early?) 2017.
Click to expand...
That's the rough timetable, as currently rumored. Announcement at PhotoKina in September, shipments 1Q of 2017. But, as we know, things can change.

PS. PhotoKina should also see Sony's new "flagship" A9 and, almost certainly, Canon 5D MKIV. So, maybe the announcements will be staggered and, despite being in different weight classes, so will the actual camera releases.
 
Hi. Do you think that the GH5 will have the 30 min recording limitation like the G7, especially after the integration of the Sony parts ? I really hope it's not the case. As a low budget events videographer (often alone), that would really suck not to be able to do, at least, 2 hours of continuous video recording.

Anyone knows anything about this ?
 
Last edited:
monks19 said:
Hi. Do you think that the GH5 will have the 30 min recording limitation like the G7, especially after the integration of the Sony parts ? I really hope it's not the case. As a low budget events videographer (often alone), that would really suck not to be able to do, at least, 2 hours of continuous video recording.

Anyone knows anything about this ?
Click to expand...

Just get a GH4 from outside Europe:

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...utions&p=1986470684&viewfull=1#post1986470684
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top