GH4 Panasonic GH5 coming in 2017

[DLD]

But surely no 1080 footage from a single chip camera will ever be 1080 - after Bayer you lose approx. 20-30% as far as I have always understood it.

Steve

This depends on what the processor does. Most consumer level cameras will lose 20%-25% in resolution. That's the reason for the 4K needing the 4.6 sensors in BMD and Canon models. Higher end cameras may double sample (remember the old CD players advertising 2X and 4X? ... this is similar, albeit without the noise shifting) in a different sequence and, some cameras (Alexa XLT and its sisters) will even claim the in-camera upscaling that delivers resolution greater than its stated number of pixels.

PS. This is done on consumer cameras too, where the Olympus OMD can triple the stills resolution with the pixel shifting technology. In a $2,000 EM1 MKII model, the pixel shifting works well on the interiors and landscape photography but it is too slow for portraiture. On a $82,000 Alexa SXT, however, the in-body upscaling seems to work well on anything.

 

[floop]

It's pretty obvious to me - having grown up in Atlanta and coming of age long before it became an international city - that "Hillbillyinagriptruck" "Floop" is just playing his character to the hilt in his revealing "GH5 vs GH4 low light 800 12800 High ISO 8bit 10bit halfass comparison Rig Job". That's the role-playing which allowed some wiley, brilliant southern senators to simply sandbag their opponents. About Panasonic's granting him "Luminary" status and trusting him with a GH5, ipsa re loqitur, which I'm pretty sure Floop could translate for you!

Sure, the folksy, self-deprecating vibe it's off-puttin' to some, but the piece is well-done IMO, with final conclusions awaiting, as he says, the production firmware. I imaging that he's accustomed to working with much more pricey sytems by his comments about DR.

So where did you lose the Southern/Appalachian accent, Floop?

Heya Peter. Not too far off. I'm Texas stock, but moved to New Zealand 15 years ago. (I know, thats more redneck than hillbilly but hillbilly sounds better.) I take my lighting and grip work seriously, but *how* i get there is often highly unorthodox - hence the nickname.

As I mentioned in the video, I *didn't* get the gh5 from panasonic. The DP made whatever connections with Panasonic, and as a gh4 shooter he wanted to "properly" test it out by shooting a short with it, so he called me in. After we wrapped there was about an hour before he had to get the camera to the courier, so I had to decide whether to shoot a test or go home. I decided to go home... but then I got a call from another DP on the fence about moving over to an a7s and selling his gh4. He asked me to roll off some high iso footage to see how it fared... 30 minutes later and that's what you saw. (Well, it took a couple days before any of us could be bothered editing it). There are some serious skeptics and haters on youtube challenging my "conclusions", which is pretty silly to me, as the only "conclusions" i reached in the video I was making up as we shot it. heh.

We don't have retail sources for lighting and grip gear in nz, so i rely heavily on online reviews and videos. When i'd desperately be trying to find out about a piece of kit that nobody had talked about and had to order it blind, I felt kinda obligated to share my experiences. I prolly do dial up my twang and drawl a bit, but its not too far off who I am. It drives me *nuts* how lofty and snobby video equipment reviewers can be, so I decided to cut the crap. I can't be bothered lighting myself and i'm not pretending to be an expert other than a guy who uses his kit to pay the bills. I personally wanna see people who use stuff talk about what does and does not suck... Which is hard because gear makers don't want to hand over gear you are gonna dog. Me being frank hasn't drawn crowds or won me any favors with the people who make stuff, so I don't see me being able to sell out in the forseeable future. I buy and use everything I talk about, so I'm not beholden to anybody. However, you'll know I've lost my integrity when I do an unboxing video. hehe. Even sites like nofilmschool and fstoppers are shy to blog about my videos (other than my lego follow focus) because they are all working so hard to keep that elitist personna. As long as what goes onto the screen looks good, all I care about is how fast we can get the next shot set.

As to the cameras I normally work on, yeah, I do heaps of stuff on really expensive kit, but I personally see no correlation between the fanciness of the camera and how proud I am of the final product. In fact, Alexas seem to come out more often when the dp isn't sure of themselves and go for the big guns for "latitude" as a butt covering.

Now I forgot what I was talkin about. Hehe. Its like one of my reviews.

ps. res ipsa loquitur!

 

[joe12south]

Even @ 180fps? Or 4K 10-bit 4:2:2 or 4K 60p?

My point is we don't know what the sweet spot is. It might be 150, it might be 227. It might be 172.3745329. A 400Mbps request is arbitrary. On the GH4, the average actual recorded data does not hit the max available bitrate. (Look at any of your files.)

 

[filmguy123]

I don't know whether it's possible to make the 400mbps IBP or not. You're talking about a tremendous increase in processing that needs to be done in an IBP codec, vs. an all-Intra codec. I mean, an astonishing increase in the level of complexity in the codec. I would not be surprised at all if they said that the chipset only handles up to 150 mbps in IBP.
.......
400mbps IBP would be probably pretty darn good. But is it possible? Does the hardware handle it? I don't know. But it would certainly be something to aspire to, and something to ask for whenever you're talking to a representative. My suspicion is that the hardware won't have the juice to do IBP at 400mbps, but that is again just wild speculation.

Interesting. I was under the impression that the mathematical calculations required for IPB encoding were somewhat of a constant, whether the bitrate was @ 100, 200, 400, or 1000. And actually, that if anything, the CPU intensive processing requirements might even DECREASE as the bitrate went up (less efficient compression needed). Now, I am no engineer, but from what I do know this is what I had assumed. Is this not the case?

I really thought higher bitrate required no additional CPU calculations, only more data throughput (which we already know the camera can handle the data throughput).

Thanks for helping me understand!

400mbps IBP would be probably pretty darn good. But is it possible? Does the hardware handle it? I don't know. But it would certainly be something to aspire to, and something to ask for whenever you're talking to a representative.

I rarely get to talk to a rep, but I know this guy who does...

 

[davedv]

400mbps IBP would be probably pretty darn good. But is it possible? Does the hardware handle it? I don't know. But it would certainly be something to aspire to, and something to ask for whenever you're talking to a representative. My suspicion is that the hardware won't have the juice to do IBP at 400mbps, but that is again just wild speculation.

What's interesting is that the 6K Photo Mode on the GH5 records internally using HEVC/H.265 at 200 Mbps. The 6K Photo Mode (which should really be called 18MP Photo Mode) records 18 megapixel video at 30 fps, which is roughly twice the number of pixels as 4K video (8.8 MP) or Ultra HD (8.3 MP). And H.265 requires significantly more processing to encode than H.264 due to the additional complexity of the codec.

So, if I had to guess, if the camera has the processing power to do H.265 encoding of 18 MP frames at 30 fps, it's probably capable doing H.264 encoding of 8 MP frames at 30 fps as well.

But what I would really like to see, is for Panasonic to offer H.265 encoding as an internal recording option for the other video modes (4K and Ultra HD at 24 to 30 fps). Because a 200 Mbps H.265 recording option for 4K video might offer similar quality as 400 Mbps H.264, but at half the storage space. (H.265 aims to be about twice as efficient in encoding as H.264, although how close it comes to achieving this depends somewhat on the encoder, encoding profile, and complexity of video being encoded).

Since a different codec would be used for H.265 recording, it's possible that some of the H.264 encoding artifacts might not appear or might be less apparent. Of course there could other, different encoding artifacts with H.265, but still it never hurts to have additional recording options. The lower bitrate required by H.265 would also mean that slower UHS-I (V30) SD cards could be used, rather than the newer UHS-II (V60 or V90) SD cards needed for 400 Mbps recording.

 

[tyger11]

deleting for inaccuracy; my apologies.

 

[davedv]

6K Photo mode is not a video mode - it's right in the name, it's a photo mode. No audio, etc, and no guaranteed fps, etc.

Does that mean that the 6K Photo mode drops frames? Or has a variable frame rate? That would be kind of strange.

My understanding was that the 6K Photo mode was very similar to the High Resolution Anamorphic mode which Panasonic has planned for inclusion in a summer firmware update. Supposedly, the high resolution anamorphic mode will shoot 18-megapixel 4:3 aspect ratio video and uses H.265 encoding, much like the 6K Photo mode. And since it is explicitly intended as a video mode, I assume it will have a constant frame rate. Not sure if this mode will record audio, but the GH4's anamorphic mode records audio (even though the 4K photo mode did not).

And while the high-res anamorphic mode sounds nice, I would still be interested in having H.265 recording options for more traditional frame sizes like 4K or 16:9 aspect ratio UHD.

 

[Vesku]

6k photo records normal 30 fps 10bit HEVC video with sound. I think the frame rate is constant. It is the best video mode in GH5. 4k video is not comparable. It is like comparing 720P vs 1080P.

GH4 4k photo records exactly the same h.264 100Mbs video than normal video modes.

 

[Thomas Smet]

What's interesting is that the 6K Photo Mode on the GH5 records internally using HEVC/H.265 at 200 Mbps. The 6K Photo Mode (which should really be called 18MP Photo Mode) records 18 megapixel video at 30 fps, which is roughly twice the number of pixels as 4K video (8.8 MP) or Ultra HD (8.3 MP). And H.265 requires significantly more processing to encode than H.264 due to the additional complexity of the codec.

So, if I had to guess, if the camera has the processing power to do H.265 encoding of 18 MP frames at 30 fps, it's probably capable doing H.264 encoding of 8 MP frames at 30 fps as well.

But what I would really like to see, is for Panasonic to offer H.265 encoding as an internal recording option for the other video modes (4K and Ultra HD at 24 to 30 fps). Because a 200 Mbps H.265 recording option for 4K video might offer similar quality as 400 Mbps H.264, but at half the storage space. (H.265 aims to be about twice as efficient in encoding as H.264, although how close it comes to achieving this depends somewhat on the encoder, encoding profile, and complexity of video being encoded).

Since a different codec would be used for H.265 recording, it's possible that some of the H.264 encoding artifacts might not appear or might be less apparent. Of course there could other, different encoding artifacts with H.265, but still it never hurts to have additional recording options. The lower bitrate required by H.265 would also mean that slower UHS-I (V30) SD cards could be used, rather than the newer UHS-II (V60 or V90) SD cards needed for 400 Mbps recording.

The Gh5 can do the 6k photo mode because there is no scaling taking place. Scaling is a massive processing hog which is how the GH4 was able to pull off 4k years ago by cropping the sensor. No scaling needed so it saved a boat load of processing power. The same with the 6k photo mode. Yes it is more pixels but they are taken as is so there is significantly less processing power used. This is also why the 180fps slow motion looks worse than the normal HD recording on the GH5. Scaling takes a lot of processing so a lower quality form of scaling is used to handle those extra frames.

 

[filmguy123]

Interesting. I was under the impression that the mathematical calculations required for IPB encoding were somewhat of a constant, whether the bitrate was @ 100, 200, 400, or 1000. And actually, that if anything, the CPU intensive processing requirements might even DECREASE as the bitrate went up (less efficient compression needed). Now, I am no engineer, but from what I do know this is what I had assumed. Is this not the case?

I really thought higher bitrate required no additional CPU calculations, only more data throughput (which we already know the camera can handle the data throughput).

Thanks for helping me understand!

Anyone know about this?

 

[Vesku]

Ipb compression (long GOP codec) can have constant bitrate or variable bitrate. GH4 has quite constant 100Mbs but it can alter rapidly 90-110 Mbs. When I stabilize my GH4 files with Mercalli V4 the resulting file is the same h.264 ipb MOV than original GH4 file but the bitrate can be anything between 50-400 Mbs depenfing on scene complexity.

 

[joe12south]

Anyone know about this?

This is an architecture specific question. There's no one answer, and we're making speculations based on murky glimpses through an opaque window. No one outside of the engineers in Japan really know exactly how the GH4-5 processing pipeline is designed.

All that said, remember, the CPU is the traffic cop...probably not the number cruncher doing the compression. In general, a higher bitrate will require more overhead.

 

[Peter Berry]

Heya Peter. Not too far off. I'm Texas stock, but moved to New Zealand 15 years ago. (I know, thats more redneck than hillbilly but hillbilly sounds better.) I take my lighting and grip work seriously, but *how* i get there is often highly unorthodox - hence the nickname.

As I mentioned in the video, I *didn't* get the gh5 from panasonic. The DP made whatever connections with Panasonic, and as a gh4 shooter he wanted to "properly" test it out by shooting a short with it, so he called me in. After we wrapped there was about an hour before he had to get the camera to the courier, so I had to decide whether to shoot a test or go home. I decided to go home... but then I got a call from another DP on the fence about moving over to an a7s and selling his gh4. He asked me to roll off some high iso footage to see how it fared... 30 minutes later and that's what you saw. (Well, it took a couple days before any of us could be bothered editing it). There are some serious skeptics and haters on youtube challenging my "conclusions", which is pretty silly to me, as the only "conclusions" i reached in the video I was making up as we shot it. heh.

We don't have retail sources for lighting and grip gear in nz, so i rely heavily on online reviews and videos. When i'd desperately be trying to find out about a piece of kit that nobody had talked about and had to order it blind, I felt kinda obligated to share my experiences. I prolly do dial up my twang and drawl a bit, but its not too far off who I am. It drives me *nuts* how lofty and snobby video equipment reviewers can be, so I decided to cut the crap. I can't be bothered lighting myself and i'm not pretending to be an expert other than a guy who uses his kit to pay the bills. I personally wanna see people who use stuff talk about what does and does not suck... Which is hard because gear makers don't want to hand over gear you are gonna dog. Me being frank hasn't drawn crowds or won me any favors with the people who make stuff, so I don't see me being able to sell out in the forseeable future. I buy and use everything I talk about, so I'm not beholden to anybody. However, you'll know I've lost my integrity when I do an unboxing video. hehe. Even sites like nofilmschool and fstoppers are shy to blog about my videos (other than my lego follow focus) because they are all working so hard to keep that elitist personna. As long as what goes onto the screen looks good, all I care about is how fast we can get the next shot set.

As to the cameras I normally work on, yeah, I do heaps of stuff on really expensive kit, but I personally see no correlation between the fanciness of the camera and how proud I am of the final product. In fact, Alexas seem to come out more often when the dp isn't sure of themselves and go for the big guns for "latitude" as a butt covering.

Now I forgot what I was talkin about. Hehe. Its like one of my reviews.

ps. res ipsa loquitur!

Thanks, Floop, for a great look into your professional life! Hillbillies come in many diverse and interesting flavors, but rednecks not so many, and live up to their stereotypes too often. My maternal granddad came out of the mountains of E Tennessee from dirt poor stock in the early 1900's, and somehow ended up as chair of Cornell U's Dept. of Ancient Languages for many years. As he once said, the ones with "get up and go", "got up and left!", which unfortunately depleted the gene pool and left too many men to their often in-bred, redneck devolution.

Seems my wife and I (with my GH5, or course!) will be visiting NZ about this time next year, as our daughter and her family are in transit on their sail boat (now in Mexico) to the South Seas, with NZ their cyclone season safe-harbour destination. Not sure where yet, but poss. Whangarei in the north, or the E. coast of the S. Island.

Thanks for correcting my poor Latin. I'll plead the "Swiss Cheese Brain" defense, as it's been 60 years since my last HS Latin class! So illegitimi non carborundum and, as always, nunquam non paratus.

 

[Cary Knoop]

Anyone know about this?

Generally the fancier the compression the more CPU encoding time you need.

For instance if you want to encode a video with H.264 very quickly use lossless compression.

 

[Landon D Parks]

My problem with the GH5 is that the improvements are not worth the cost over the GH4. The main draw is of course the 4:2:2 10-bit internal, but that has some issues. There is already websites finding some issues with the internal recording, not to mention the fact that its currently maxed at 150mbps recording. Yeah, 400mbps all-i has been announced, but who knows how good it will be - if it ever comes, and its still going to be in a crappy AVC/MP4 format.

A better option is my opinion is still a GH4 with an Atomos Ninja Flame. For around $2,200 total (cost of a new GH4 + Atomos), you get a camera capable of 10-bit 4:2:2 at ProRes and DNx post-ready quality, the ability to monitor v-log with a lut, high res 7" 10-bit HDR screen, and all the scopes and meters we need to be happy. Slap a $160 Tascam DR-60 on there, and you have a full-fledged production-ready 4k camera. With the GH5, for $2,000 - you get a GH4 with minor upgrades - no external screen, same crappy AVCHD/MP4 recording, limited scopes and graphs, tiny tiny screen, crappy audio solution relying on internal audio recording...

Basically, I see no advantage to a GH5 to someone looking to get a GH5 without currently owning a GH4 (about the same cost for a GH4/Atomos), and I certainly wouldn't recommend an upgrade from the GH4 to the GH5 - I'd say get an Atomos and have a better production camera setup.

I own a GH4 w/ vlog, Atomos Ninja Flame, and Tascam DR-60 Mark II, and I can tell you - the quality of the image off the recording at DNxHD 220x is stunning, as is the audio quality. I fail to see what a GH5 would offer to me.

 

[Ned Kelly]

My problem with the GH5 is that the improvements are not worth the cost over the GH4. The main draw is of course the 4:2:2 10-bit internal, but that has some issues. There is already websites finding some issues with the internal recording, not to mention the fact that its currently maxed at 150mbps recording. Yeah, 400mbps all-i has been announced, but who knows how good it will be - if it ever comes, and its still going to be in a crappy AVC/MP4 format.

A better option is my opinion is still a GH4 with an Atomos Ninja Flame. For around $2,200 total (cost of a new GH4 + Atomos), you get a camera capable of 10-bit 4:2:2 at ProRes and DNx post-ready quality, the ability to monitor v-log with a lut, high res 7" 10-bit HDR screen, and all the scopes and meters we need to be happy. Slap a $160 Tascam DR-60 on there, and you have a full-fledged production-ready 4k camera. With the GH5, for $2,000 - you get a GH4 with minor upgrades - no external screen, same crappy AVCHD/MP4 recording, limited scopes and graphs, tiny tiny screen, crappy audio solution relying on internal audio recording...

Basically, I see no advantage to a GH5 to someone looking to get a GH5 without currently owning a GH4 (about the same cost for a GH4/Atomos), and I certainly wouldn't recommend an upgrade on'the GH4 to the GH5 - I'd say get an Atomos and have a better production camera setup.

I own a GH4 w/ vlog, Atomos Ninja Flame, and Tascam DR-60 Mark II, and I can tell you - the quality of the image off the recording at DNxHD 220x is stunning, as is the audio quality. I fail to see what a GH5 would offer to me.

Well don't buy it

 

[Ned Kelly]

Well don't buy it.

 

[steve phillipps]

Well don't buy it

Sounds like he's not going to, but I assume his post is as much to elucidate his thought processes in order to help others make their decisions?

Steve

 

[Ned Kelly]

elucidate, not sure what that means to be honest. Why buy a camera that hasn't been realised if you're not happy about it.

 

[Vardalos]

My problem with the GH5 is that the improvements are not worth the cost over the GH4. The main draw is of course the 4:2:2 10-bit internal, but that has some issues. There is already websites finding some issues with the internal recording, not to mention the fact that its currently maxed at 150mbps recording. Yeah, 400mbps all-i has been announced, but who knows how good it will be - if it ever comes, and its still going to be in a crappy AVC/MP4 format.

A better option is my opinion is still a GH4 with an Atomos Ninja Flame. For around $2,200 total (cost of a new GH4 + Atomos), you get a camera capable of 10-bit 4:2:2 at ProRes and DNx post-ready quality, the ability to monitor v-log with a lut, high res 7" 10-bit HDR screen, and all the scopes and meters we need to be happy. Slap a $160 Tascam DR-60 on there, and you have a full-fledged production-ready 4k camera. With the GH5, for $2,000 - you get a GH4 with minor upgrades - no external screen, same crappy AVCHD/MP4 recording, limited scopes and graphs, tiny tiny screen, crappy audio solution relying on internal audio recording...

Basically, I see no advantage to a GH5 to someone looking to get a GH5 without currently owning a GH4 (about the same cost for a GH4/Atomos), and I certainly wouldn't recommend an upgrade from the GH4 to the GH5 - I'd say get an Atomos and have a better production camera setup.

I own a GH4 w/ vlog, Atomos Ninja Flame, and Tascam DR-60 Mark II, and I can tell you - the quality of the image off the recording at DNxHD 220x is stunning, as is the audio quality. I fail to see what a GH5 would offer to me.

Landon’s comments mirror my thoughts………….I have already have a GH4 and a PIX-E5 Monitor Recorder for my 10bit needs and agree, now is not the right time to jump in. Lets all take a deep breath and wait until the GH5 has been released and its firmware is a bit more mature.