GH4 Panasonic GH5 coming in 2017
- Thread starter Dan Keeble
- Start date
I wonder how they got a pre-production copy of the GH5. There's not much content on their Youtube channel and what is there seems a bit, how do you say, ordinary?
(BTW if I posted a GH5 test video to my Youtube channel right now then I'd totally understand someone making the same argument against me!)
joe12south
Veteran
Looks like what I would expect from a roughly 12 stop camera in direct sunlight when exposing for the subjects. Nothing about the GH5 specs indicated a significant improvement here. It would have been interesting to see what it would have looked like had they protected the highlights and then lifted in the shadows in post.
joe12south
Veteran
Thx!
iPhonedo published a CES 2017 interview with a Panasonic rep. At around the 4:00 mark the Panasonic rep talks about the Summer firmware upgrade that will enable 400 Mbps 10-bit 4:2:2 FULL SENSOR anamorphic recording, which would be a 5K shooting mode. He also mentions non-anamorphic OPEN GATE 400 Mbps 10-bit 4:2:2 FULL SENSOR recording, where you do your 16:9 cropping in post from the FULL SENSOR recording.
combatentropy
Veteran
Yep. The numbers I wrote are exactly as intended
I'm sorry. I thought y'all were talking about the camera, whose video bitrates will only be up to 500 Mbps (62.5 MB/s). Plus I've often seen people mix up their b's and B's. And then I did my own math wrong and calculated that USB 3.0 was much less than 500 MB/s. But you're right, USB 3.0 in fact can handle up to 625 MB/s. And USB 3.1 Generation 2 can do twice that. And Thunderbolt 3, the latest jack on computers, can do 40 Gbps (5 GB/s).
Last edited:
Thomas Smet
Veteran
I love that they used the term open gate. Depending how good the 400mbps all-I format is I could see using that a lot and cropping vertically in post to what I need. External monitoring might be interesting however but to have a true 5k camera is interesting indeed.
Yes I thought the combination of OPEN GATE and ALEXA was interesting.
No crop for a Micro 4/3 camera, or a crop factor of 2.0 when compared to a Full Frame camera.
joe1946
Veteran
It would have a 200-800mm FF eqiv in 4K on the GH5.
visceralpsyche
Well-known member
Napkin maths for those interested:
With no crop of the sensor readout, using the regular Metabones 0.71x Speed Booster will get you an ultimate crop factor of 1.42x full frame, or an effective frame width of 25.2mm (larger than APS-C).
Super35 film gives you 24mm along the wide edge (a 1.5x crop factor compared to full frame).
So your Speed Booster enhanced GH5 will give you DCI 4K recording at 10bit 4:2:2 along with an extra stop of light, with a slightly wider field of view than an actual Super35 camera (yeay for closer to full frame depth of field!), all for around US$2500.
Welcome to 2017's new baseline.
Over to you, Sony et al
Cheers,
Paul
With no crop of the sensor readout, using the regular Metabones 0.71x Speed Booster will get you an ultimate crop factor of 1.42x full frame, or an effective frame width of 25.2mm (larger than APS-C).
Super35 film gives you 24mm along the wide edge (a 1.5x crop factor compared to full frame).
So your Speed Booster enhanced GH5 will give you DCI 4K recording at 10bit 4:2:2 along with an extra stop of light, with a slightly wider field of view than an actual Super35 camera (yeay for closer to full frame depth of field!), all for around US$2500.
Welcome to 2017's new baseline.
Over to you, Sony et al
Cheers,
Paul
DeadEyesSmiling
Well-known member
Napkin maths for those interested:
With no crop of the sensor readout, using the regular Metabones 0.71x Speed Booster will get you an ultimate crop factor of 1.42x full frame, or an effective frame width of 25.2mm (larger than APS-C).
Super35 film gives you 24mm along the wide edge (a 1.5x crop factor compared to full frame).
So your Speed Booster enhanced GH5 will give you DCI 4K recording at 10bit 4:2:2 along with an extra stop of light, with a slightly wider field of view than an actual Super35 camera (yeay for closer to full frame depth of field!), all for around US$2500.
Welcome to 2017's new baseline.
Over to you, Sony et al
Cheers,
Paul
And would it be correct that the Speed Booster Ultra (0.71x) would allow pretty much all lenses (FF and APS-C) without any worry of vignette, whereas the Speed Booster XL (0.64x) will see some vignette problems on the wider APS-C lenses with the GH5?
-DES
clifford maxwell
Member
I can't recall if it was this thread or somewhere else, but someone reported that Ex.Tele Conversion works with 4K recording now, which by sampling a 1:1 central portion of the sensor adds a further 1.4x crop. So that PL100-400 would become 140-560mm.
visceralpsyche
Well-known member
Yes, although at 1.42x crop, it's technically a touch wider than APS-C lenses, but I think in practice nearly all of them should work just fine with the 0.71x Speed Booster. The XL though, might well have a bit of vignetting on some lenses, but usually if you push in a millimeter or two of focal length you can get rid of that, with the resulting field of view comparable to using the regular Speed Booster with no push-in.
Cheers,
Paul
Thomas Smet
Veteran
2.09x to be more accurate. M43 can never be perfectly 2.0x crop. A 35mm sensor is 36mm wide. 1/2 of that is 18mm and m43 is 17.3mm. So all m43 cameras are always slightly more than 2.0x
Thomas Smet
Veteran
Napkin maths for those interested:
With no crop of the sensor readout, using the regular Metabones 0.71x Speed Booster will get you an ultimate crop factor of 1.42x full frame, or an effective frame width of 25.2mm (larger than APS-C).
Super35 film gives you 24mm along the wide edge (a 1.5x crop factor compared to full frame).
So your Speed Booster enhanced GH5 will give you DCI 4K recording at 10bit 4:2:2 along with an extra stop of light, with a slightly wider field of view than an actual Super35 camera (yeay for closer to full frame depth of field!), all for around US$2500.
Welcome to 2017's new baseline.
Over to you, Sony et al
Cheers,
Paul
After accounting for the blanked out portion of the sensor used for calculations it is more like 23.56mm. Arri Alexa in many of its 16x9 modes is 23.76mm. That is really really close.
filmguy123
Veteran
Is there a difference in image characteristics between using saying a 25mm native MFT lens to achieve 50mm
VS using a 35m FF lens adapted via speed booster .71x to achieve the same focal length?
IE, would the resulting background image experience more compression from the longer 35m, lens focal length (in a desirable, closer to S35 look) than as with the native 25mm MFT lens?
Note I am not talking about FOV. I know those would be the same. But no matter how I slice it, there's always something different about the aesthetic of a larger sensor cameras and I am wondering if having to use a naturally wider piece of glass on native M43 affects the background characteristics differently?
On a more extreme example: Is there a difference between a 12mm native MFT lens to get a equiv 24mm FF look VS a 24mm piece of glass on FF? Do those two focal lengths cause light to interact with the glass different?
I'm wondering what sort of difference I might see in the image if I moved away from my Voigtlander Nokton 25mm native MFT to a Zeiss Milvus 35mm on speedbooster, to achieve the same 50mm FF FOV look. Would this render the image and background compression differently?
VS using a 35m FF lens adapted via speed booster .71x to achieve the same focal length?
IE, would the resulting background image experience more compression from the longer 35m, lens focal length (in a desirable, closer to S35 look) than as with the native 25mm MFT lens?
Note I am not talking about FOV. I know those would be the same. But no matter how I slice it, there's always something different about the aesthetic of a larger sensor cameras and I am wondering if having to use a naturally wider piece of glass on native M43 affects the background characteristics differently?
On a more extreme example: Is there a difference between a 12mm native MFT lens to get a equiv 24mm FF look VS a 24mm piece of glass on FF? Do those two focal lengths cause light to interact with the glass different?
I'm wondering what sort of difference I might see in the image if I moved away from my Voigtlander Nokton 25mm native MFT to a Zeiss Milvus 35mm on speedbooster, to achieve the same 50mm FF FOV look. Would this render the image and background compression differently?
combatentropy
Veteran
Background compression is caused by distance.
Look around you, and find something far away. Now look at whatever is behind it. The relationship, the compression, between the first object and the stuff behind it will not change, as long as you don't change where you're sitting, move your head, or otherwise move your position.
Background compression is caused by distance.
Now these two objects you noticed make up just a small part of all the things you see from where you are. To single them out, you need a long lens, which paints a square around them, blocking out everything else.
So there it is. If you want two objects to look close to each other, get far away from them. Likewise if you want a man's facial features to be in good proportion to each other, stand a good distance away from him. If you want his nose to get big, walk up and stand really close to him, like just a foot away. Notice that I haven't asked you to pick up your camera yet and choose a lens.
Once you determine the ideal distance to be from your subject, then you choose a lens based on how much of all you see you want to crop out.
I have heard one or two other people claim that a 50mm on a 135 camera will look "different" than a 35mm on a S35 camera, which will look different than a 25mm on a 4/3 camera. Putting aside that these are only rough equivalents, and that the different shots will be cropped slightly differently, assuming that you never move, but just set down one camera and pick up the next, and so on, they should, by everything I know, look identical (except of course other slight differences you would see due to in lens coatings, bokeh, color, and other differences among glass).
These claims that there is a difference need to be backed up with scientific tests and posted image samples. Otherwise, it's just a legend. In fact, I have seen tests done, and the images look the same.
Look around you, and find something far away. Now look at whatever is behind it. The relationship, the compression, between the first object and the stuff behind it will not change, as long as you don't change where you're sitting, move your head, or otherwise move your position.
Background compression is caused by distance.
Now these two objects you noticed make up just a small part of all the things you see from where you are. To single them out, you need a long lens, which paints a square around them, blocking out everything else.
So there it is. If you want two objects to look close to each other, get far away from them. Likewise if you want a man's facial features to be in good proportion to each other, stand a good distance away from him. If you want his nose to get big, walk up and stand really close to him, like just a foot away. Notice that I haven't asked you to pick up your camera yet and choose a lens.
Once you determine the ideal distance to be from your subject, then you choose a lens based on how much of all you see you want to crop out.
I have heard one or two other people claim that a 50mm on a 135 camera will look "different" than a 35mm on a S35 camera, which will look different than a 25mm on a 4/3 camera. Putting aside that these are only rough equivalents, and that the different shots will be cropped slightly differently, assuming that you never move, but just set down one camera and pick up the next, and so on, they should, by everything I know, look identical (except of course other slight differences you would see due to in lens coatings, bokeh, color, and other differences among glass).
These claims that there is a difference need to be backed up with scientific tests and posted image samples. Otherwise, it's just a legend. In fact, I have seen tests done, and the images look the same.
Last edited: