GH5 sharpness / NR in GH5s - and photos ?

coutard / Deezid,

This is a relatively known issue and a common complaint. Some people don't have an eye for it, I suppose, but for those who do, here is what is semi common knowledge in the community:

Native electronic m43 glass has an electronic connection with the m43 body, and Panasonic is known to correct lens distortion electronically. This correction causes softness. To compensate, sharpening is applied. Many consumers cannot distinguish between this digital sharpening (contrast edge enhancement) vs detail resolving, so for many people without an eye for this, it's a non issue. Then of course, there is always the argument of taste - if someone likes it, is it bad? I'll leave the subjective vs objective nature of that for a more philosophical post.

More to your question, it has been found that taping over the electronic contacts on the lens removes this effect. Granted you lose iris and focus control as well, so it's no good as a functional solution, but it demonstrates the artificial distortion correction and sharpening that happens. It is not that Panasonic ignores the issue, its that the problem is a bit larger. Perhaps its kept hush hush because to offer a kill switch could be to highlight lens deficiencies. Who knows, but its there, and it's unlikely to change.

If you are seeing more aesthetically pleasing footage online, it is likely shot with non native glass (adapted), or non electronic native glass. I have had good luck with voigtlander lenses, or you could try adapting vintage glass (nikons, minolta), or modern glass if you prefer. Any of these will give better results. As others mentioned, others may correct this using other tools: physical diffusion filters, diffusion or subtle softening plug ins, etc.

And FWIW, you are far from alone on this issue, and many people have acknowledged it.
 
Every time I buy a new piece of gear I have to go through a learning-process to figure out the best way to use it to get the results that I want. I know that the default settings from one camera will never match the default settings of another camera because every camera is different. I think it's unrealistic to expect optimum performance from any piece of gear without first learning how to use it, and this includes controlling the image sharpness and contrast. ( I hated my GH4 for the first few weeks I owned it because I did not know how to get the results I wanted, but over time I figured it out. Same with my GH5. )
 
Every time I buy a new piece of gear I have to go through a learning-process to figure out the best way to use it to get the results that I want. I know that the default settings from one camera will never match the default settings of another camera because every camera is different. I think it's unrealistic to expect optimum performance from any piece of gear without first learning how to use it, and this includes controlling the image sharpness and contrast. ( I hated my GH4 for the first few weeks I owned it because I did not know how to get the results I wanted, but over time I figured it out. Same with my GH5. )

Lesson number one......

Lesson number two. Don't listen to punditry, especially when it comes to optics. I've seen amazing footage from Panasonic lenses and truly awful footage from non-native lenses. So, repeat lesson one.
 
I've shot amazing footage on Panasonic lenses, and it's still a fact that they apply electronic sharpening.

I'm just surprised how this thread has turned from "how do I reduce sharpening and why does it look this way?" to "you can still take good pictures even with such" or "it doesn't bother me/I can't perceive it, so it's not a problem" or "pay more".
 
It is not that Panasonic ignores the issue, its that the problem is a bit larger. Perhaps its kept hush hush because to offer a kill switch could be to highlight lens deficiencies.

C'mon. **ALL** lenses have distortion. The ability to correct it in camera is a feature, not an issue. There's no cover-up. If you don't like the aesthetic, don't use those lenses. No need to call Mulder & Sculley.
 
It is not that Panasonic ignores the issue, its that the problem is a bit larger. Perhaps its kept hush hush because to offer a kill switch could be to highlight lens deficiencies.

C'mon. **ALL** lenses have distortion. The ability to correct it in camera is a feature, not an issue. There's no cover-up. If you don't like the aesthetic, don't use those lenses. No need to call Mulder & Sculley.
 
C'mon. **ALL** lenses have distortion. The ability to correct it in camera is a feature, not an issue. There's no cover-up.

All lenses have distortion, some have more. This is not an opinion I am expressing regarding Panasonic's image pipeline, just a solution to a question asked.

Yes, it is a feature. One that can't be turned off and may result in undesirable aesthetic.

The reasons why it cannot be disabled are of course for the realm of speculation.

If you don't like the aesthetic, don't use those lenses.

I believe that was the provided advice ;)
 
I've shot amazing footage on Panasonic lenses, and it's still a fact that they apply electronic sharpening.

I'm just surprised how this thread has turned from "how do I reduce sharpening and why does it look this way?" to "you can still take good pictures even with such" or "it doesn't bother me/I can't perceive it, so it's not a problem" or "pay more".

Any thread will turn into that as soon as somebody tries to label the camera as having an issue or somehow defective or lacking. I'm one of the people that pointed out the electronic sharpening to you so of course I know it is there. That isn't the point, the point is as soon as somebody labeled Panasonic as a company that ignores the issue I called them out on it. There is no issue to ignore. The camera is designed that way for a reason and part of the reason so many love the video from the GH5.

I also don't like any form of electronic enhancement and will happily discuss ways of getting around that but I will not accept anybody trying to label Panasonic as a company ignoring the issue. That is slander and has no basis in fact. Say you wish the camera had the ability to turn it off and ask for it as a feature but don't say the company ignores the pleas of users. What pleas? Is there a petition somewhere that I missed? Only a handful of people even understand what the electronic sharpening is and that it is there so I doubt there are a ton of people requesting for it to change.
 
good there are many reactions !

First of all, I'm not using native glass. As a previous C100 owner I still had a couple of Canon Zooms (17-55, 24-105, sigma 18-35) so I just bought a metabones ultra. Since the 17-55 is vignetting (I opened another thread, this is likely due to the slightly bigger sensor on GH5s), and since I don't have any wide angle lens anymore, I was thinking of selling all my Canon glass & metabones, crying for my bad call, and buying either a 12-35 or a 12-60 from panasonic.

But from what I read here I'm not so sure anymore.

Anyway I agree that it takes some time. I didn't like my C100s footage at first, but then I found the settings I liked. I hope to find some good settings over time for GH5s.

I'll shoot some more test footage with NR & sharpness all the way down
 
The Metabones XL (0.64) is the wrong Speed Booster for the GH5S, you need the Ultra/MFT model (.71) which should work fine without vignetting.
Cheers
 
Last edited:
There are two sources of artificial sharpening that could damper the image. 1 Panasonic lenses, sharpening is added automatically(can't get rid of it) if you use native glass. Second is if you haven't turned down in camera sharpening to -5.

Otherwise I am not sure what you are seeing. M4/3 has a larger depth of field then s35 sesnor like the A6300 has. Maybe that is what you are noticing. If you are coming from Canon they definately have a softer look. As do higher end cameras like the Alexas.

You might want to avoid lenses like the Sigma 18-35 as it gives a very modern sharp look. Rather then selling your APS-C lenses why not just get a simple adapter with no vignetting.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top