Leaderboard

I've collected a few gems from Facebook:

In my ongoing self-appointed role as "LOG gamma" police, I've created a video that shows how RAW is processed into images we use, both for photography and video. It drives me nuts that people talk about 14+ stops of DR, as if noise, or sensor pixel sensitivity, stays constant from lower to higher values. After 5 stops, IMHO, noise makes any extra DR recorded by the sensor quite undesirable. Further, even in 5 stops of DR there is a huge difference between how well cameras record DR even in fairly well exposed image. That is to say, the GH5S isn't better only because it can record in low light. It can be better because even at ISO 800 it will get a richer image in the shadows. However, it is still 8-bit. It still throws out gobs of sensor data. Well, enough of that. Another video to put you to sleep

You mean, like... I'll be informing the authorities about this!

I would also point to a very important observation by @AaronChicago...having a camera that can shoot in the dark can be a novel concept as with the A7s years ago, but beauty in Cinematography comes from light and how a good Gaffer shapes that light....being able to shoot in the dark may work for a brief emergency shot you have to get (referring to narrative of course) but as ugly as a midday image without the correct shade and bounce is, the equivalent is true for shooting practically in the dark...just the other side of the spectrum to shooting in noon sun...the image in both cases is flat and uninteresting...it's light in whatever form you use it, that creates the beautiful imagery we drool over in the Cinema...the camera comes fairly far behind that...that's maybe the biggest reason for me not rushing to get in a pre order....I don't shoot in the dark and the GH5 gives me a more than adequate night shot, of say cars moving by in a wide city street shot....if there are people in the shot and they are significant to the story, there would be lights too.

Just to confirm and recommend also. Temporal noise reduction segment is, in fact, pretty fast and accurate - in many case even totally adequate and sufficiеnt. With newer Resolve incarnation noise reduction is not longer so to say "pain in the ass".

Please change your member status to "Log Police" in your profile

Concerning the EVA1 comparisons, have a look at the following video at around the 20mn mark, there is talk/footage comparing GH5 to EVA1 IQ specifically regarding DR, color, detail, motion & sharpening.. the difference is pretty drastic imo (EVA1 owners shouldn't have to worry about their investment!)

Something to chew on.

Just last month I went to visit Panasonic UK for a hands-on with the new Panasonic GH5S. My full review is in the pipeline but first an introduction to the new camera on the block... The GH5S has a newly developed 10.2MP sensor for enhanced low light performance, as well as 240fps 1080p S&Q. Furthermore for the first time since the GH2 this sensor is an over-sized 1.86x crop multi-aspect sensor. Possible for the first time is 60p at Cinema 4K resolution (4096 x 2160), whereas the GH5 is just Ultra HD 60p. The field-of-view will be slightly wider in Cinema 4K on the GH5S compared to the GH5 due to the larger sensor. The new CMOS also brings colour improvements with a new 14bit readout and less noise. Read the full article

@maxotics YESSSS! And here's your profile pic:

There's a few major reasons: 1. Vibrations. Turning off stabilization doesn't hard-mount the sensor to the body of the camera--it just tells the electromagnets to try and hold the sensor as still as possible (in relation to the camera). That means whether or not IBIS is turned on, the sensor is always floating. Some forces that act on the camera, such as vibration from a car or motorized gimbal movement, can actually overpower the magnets and shake the sensor around, which is an annoying jitter at best and unwatchable mush at worst. Great example at 3:15: 2. Lower heat. By putting the sensor directly onto a heatsink, it reduces heat buildup on the sensor, and therefore noise. Seeing as how low noise is one of the selling points of the camera, that makes perfect sense to me. 3. Dual native ISO. My understanding is that the circuitry required is more involved than what's on the GH5, and therefore would not be possible (or at least more difficult/less effective) if the sensor were in motion during recording. 4. Multi-aspect sensor. Since the sensor is larger, moving it around inside the mount wouldn't be feasible, and could put portions of the imaging area outside of the lens image circle. 5. Battery life. The new sensor is quite power-hungry, so adding IBIS on top of that would make the hit to power consumption impractical for many users. 6. IBIS can cause undesirable artifacts when the camera is in motion. Not only unpredictability in panning speed, as the camera has to recognize and compensate for the fact that the camera is supposed to be moving, but also strange warping and perspective shifts (especially with wide angle lenses). Good example here at 9:30: 7: Processing. By not having to use a portion of the camera's processor to do all the math required for IBIS, that processing power can be utilized for other functions, such as better NR, faster/higher-res HFR, and pulling a higher bit depth off the sensor (beneficial even when encoding that data to 10-bit video). Everyone seems confused as to why Pananasonic left IBIS off this camera, but in my eyes, they've made their reasons perfectly clear.

Well, the shot looks like she was a scream queen from a Dario Argento color fest, doesn´t she? I just didn´t worry about logical color nor about polluted highlights. It still looks creamy and luscious, just not accurate but giving the estimation of a cinematic image, still miles ahead of DSLM color, being rich and luxurious.:)

oh yeah, the GH series is definitely well-suited to your needs. but the notion that one camera "beats" another is pretty dumb. we all know you choose the tool that suits your needs, and yet, we see comments like: the GH5S's low light ability "redeems" panasonic for the EVA1. it doesn't do that any more than a new coffee maker from Panasonic redeems their latest espresso machine for being too complicated -- some people need the flexibility to pull the perfect espresso shot, others want to hit one button to make coffee. it's not a competition. FYI -- Jon, i don't know if you use Resolve but the NR they implemented in v12.5 is inches away from what Neat Video can do, but a lot easier to work with. It's pretty darn good. hopefully youtube isn't hiding the same issue and this Venus Engine's NR is an improvement over the GH5. fingers firmly crossed.

And yet people will complain over and over about a camera having 12 stops of DR instead of 14+, and call it "not a cinema camera because the DR is too low"

Next time I’m standing out in -30 filming the aurora borealis at ISO 25000 I’ll console myself with the knowledge that I’m impoverished... There are times when a high ISO makes a genuine difference - I’m not interested in the GH5s until Sony have confirmed what they might do with the A7s3 (or I persuade myself that I can afford a C200).

The Sony F3 is worth so little that there is no point selling it. And having a big "cinema camera" in the eyes of some people can have its benefits too, that a DSLR will never quite do :-/ Sad but true. I agree crazy high ISO is silly, but good clean 3200 or 6400? Fantastic. It means you can shoot faster with less lights:

No, when you move away from a base/native ISO, you lose dynamic range the further away you get. With the GH5S, the dual native ISO reclaims those lost stops at 2500, that you would have lost on the GH5 if you were just gaining up from the native ISO 400. So a GH5 at ISO 2500 will have less dynamic range than a GH5S at 2500. But put them both at ISO 400 and they will both be the same. That's the thing many are missing about the dual ISO function. It's less about noise, and more about maintaining equivalent dynamic range at two ISOs.

HI, Guys, i m a new user. this is a first test whit my new toys Anamorphot 2x the video is shot whit gh5 and the 25 mm leica whit the ex tele conv ON thanks for watchcing https://vimeo.com/249584580

I've been following this guy for a couple weeks. He strictly uses the NX1. Thought it might interest this group.

Would love for that to be the case...especially given higher sensitivity..there will likely be something in the frame that's "hot". If so..that, along with timecode i/o would help in more pro setups. Timecode is a game-changer in this camera class. Even c200 lacks it. Not just a multicam feature..more often it's for dual system audio crews. Regarding Panny rep's comment on audio, hard to say whether there is improvement beyond the onboard mic. They need to put the monitoring latency bypass feature back in.

Zak, my bet is that overprocessed sharpness on GH5 also comes from its 20MP high rezzed sensor as even anamorphic samples from there show it. So the stuff must be calmer down this time, my guess. Hope not to be too naive here. I've found blur as a good workaround though. Odd to admit it. E :-)

You understand me, Emanuel. Thank you:)

+1 Cinema is inaccurate coloring the world... ;-)

I put the Excel file where you, or anyone, can get it, if interested in the code. It's a freakin' mess. Lost of old stuff in there, but if you're like me, you just need to poke around to get what bits you want. The hardest part for me was figuring out how to get the RAW data out as integer values. Turned out it could be done in a few lines of Python code. Excel with VBA Download: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1d6-tBeVcbyiVOCXgSRiV2eNe80ipfruR PYTHON import rawpy import numpy raw = rawpy.imread('D:\\Files2018_Maxotics_Analysis\\RAWExplainDR\\7D_RAW\\DNGs\\M08-2120_DNG_000001\\M08-2120_000520.DNG') rawdata = raw.raw_image numpy.savetxt("D:\\Files2018_Maxotics_Analysis\\RAWExplainDR\\7D_RAW\\DataToCSVs\\dng520.csv", rawdata, delimiter=",")

To be clear, I'm only referring to the release reel Liam posted that's referenced in the Art Adams article (say that five times fast). The 2015 reel you posted looks quite lovely in comparison. Much stronger colors and more neutral skintones. I think the fact that the Cion/BM4K sensor looks better than a lot of "better" models out today bears closer examination. Often, cameras trade off low light performance and dynamic range for inferior color rendering. For example, by letting the blue filters in the array pass a bit of green as well, boosting the signal in that channel, they contaminate the blue signal and make it harder for the camera to separate the channels in processing. The early Reds had a problem with this, and it resulted in a lot of muddy color. Some interesting insights into the CMOSIS sensor vs its competitors in the current marketplace: http://www.bmcuser.com/showthread.php?17318-No-more-love-for-the-4K

No idea if I should be happy or sad...

I figured that you wouldnt be a fan of the rendering, after reading your reply:) Horses for courses- I like that saying much better. But with language too- horses for courses. Camera had firmware updates, that I know.

Great explainer. Helpful primer on photographic data. You should be a teacher, if you aren't one already.

Near "super 35" sensors will always be coveted by filmmakers as a matter of a long withstanding convention. It can and will change, but for now I don't personally know many ppl complaining about the super 35 -ish format in real world applications. Full frame is more desired in photography, but there's a growing movement to go medium format as those systems come down in price. It's all relative to how wide you want to go and obtain a shallow depth of feild and light gathering abilities. Usually, if you're shooting wide, it's because you want to show the breadth and detail of the entire frame. Therefore, I feel the sweet spot is super 35, but I'm not married to my own opinions either. The lowest I'm currently willing to go as far as production is APS-C with back illumination. Samsung spoiled me in this regard. I'm not touching mirco four thirds with your 10 foot pole. A simple physics issue for me.

This is a very interesting comment. I sort of laugh when DXO Mark assigns a good "landscape" score for 14+ stops of dynamic range (that I doubt are really there) as if we need 14 stops of dynamic range to shoot landscapes. Granted, the zone system asks for 10, but most color landscape photography (almost all of the best stuff) is shot on slide film, which has 5-6 stops of dynamic range. A printed photo will never have more than five stops of contrast (except with vantablack). So anything with a lot more dynamic range in the original scene will either look washed out or need to be compressed in processing or with an ND grad for a print. Even the zone system usually results in a rather tone-mapped print. (I never thought the zone system and tone mapping would work well in color–see Peter Lik's nicely composed but garishly processed photos. But then I realized it sort of can–see the Revenant, which is beautifully processed.) The best looking (color) images I've seen, at least technically, are relatively "flat" scenes shot on 4x5 Velvia and viewed as slides on a light table–comprising four stops of scene dynamic range viewed backlit on an analogue display with as much contrast (display dynamic range) as an OLED and far better resolution and color. Looks hyper-real. Hyper-saturated. The Sigma doesn't get close. Not even close. But it does get a lot closer than most dSLRs. (Fwiw, LED screens can display almost 10 stops of contrast, as backlit displays are much more contrasty than front-lit. OLEDs and plasma can display even more, but room ambience washes it out and you need a very high nit (10,000+) display to get the effect of a HDR display, which is even more stunning than the light table but not commercially viable.) Furthermore, this gets controversial so take it with a grain of salt, but I had to grade footage from a high end 4k camera with a bayer sensor to match Kodak motion picture film. I used the vector scope to match chips on a color checker chart to set up a basic grade and found two things: even when everything matched (same saturation and hue) the film looked more saturated; and I could never match the vectorscopes perfectly because the graded video had a more diffuse point cloud around each color, the film had narrow peaks. I'm generalizing here, of course, but I believe Bayer sensors have inherent limitations. (So does Foveon, just different.)

I say this until I'm blue in the face. I'd add how a good Gaffer shapes "good" light. Day-for-night is an example of how cinematographers used good light to get the look they want (as if night) instead of a super grain/noisey image they'd get if they shot in real night. Another way to say what you're saying, is the only difference between an A7S/GH5S in good light shaped to look, say "romantic" and an A7D/GH5S in low light which is naturally "romantic" is the second will be full of noise. Both can look equally "romantic" if the gaffer knows his stuff. Shooting in low light should ALWAYS be avoided at ALL COSTS unless NOISE is what you're after. I understand most people will use these cameras outdoors, or indoor where they can't control the light. For those purposes, those cameras fit the bill! But for studio/set work? Put your money in lights and modifiers--control light/noise so your camera DOES NOT STRUGGLE, don't become a slave to the camera's signal/noise ratio

I don't know if I mentioned this before, Bill Claff did a DR test of some Sigma cameras and found a DR of 6. He was flamed off some forums for reporting those findings, which I believe true. But they do NOT make a difference, at least to me. We don't look at images beyond that range. The flip side of the question is, aren't the Nikon images too low in contrast (too washed out?). Nikon has the widest DR tested. But again, the question isn't how much DR of the physical world a camera captures, but how well it can deliver sensor values into our 6 DR viewing space. In my tests, when I've tried to match bayer images with Sigma images I have never been able to get the same saturation look. The bayers always look slightly washed out in comparison. That's to say, if you do get the Sigma camera and have the time to work each RAW image to match contrast, the Sigma will still maintain that 3D look--definitely against an APS-C sized sensor. As for why no one uses it in a studio. Let me be blunt. A studio is for fast, efficient professional work where the end-user is almost never looking for the kind of quality that separates cameras. Therefore, the Sigma is too slow. Second, most photographers are technically weak; that is, they don't really understand what the camera is doing under the hood. Third, they need to justify in their mind why their camera is already the best. To be fair, as I've said, I would not use a Sigma cameras for professional work. I'd only use it as a fine art photographer. I'd DEFINITELY use it for portraits, but again, not for typical professional work--it's just too slow and time is money! If you're just starting out and don't have the money for a D810/D850, the Sigma will give you a Medium Format look that I believe will impress people. I did some tests I did 5 years ago trying to match bayer to Sigma cameras. I couldn't do it. But again, if I don't know any better (like most people ), bayer images are fine! http://maxotics.com/2012/11/26/sigma-dp2s-vs-sony-nex5-with-18-55mm/

Just looking through every impressions riew I can find again and they pretty much all say how the camera is great up to either 6400 or 12800. They are not talking about it as better than an A7s for low light. Some add in the at same DOF argument but again, that is a lot less often than many would use. DPRs uses both and most are at the same ISO yet seem to not have DOF issues and the same DOF shots are all very close in. For stills of course the A7s will still have a DR advantage at low ISO and can shoot at a lower ISO too as well as having a DR advantage at higher ISOs.' It is not the low light ability that makes this the video camera to get, it is other video specs like 8bit 420 VS 10 bit 422 but the low light being very good is what helps sell it.: Choices have never been better.

You can get a bmpc4k + ursa mini 4k all kittet out for less than $3k... sign me up. Imo, the bmpc4k is the best image from any blackmagic so far. Its HD kicks the butt of gh5, a7sii or any other 4K consumer stuff. Much more detail without the over sharpened look. The DR and Lowlight is what it is. Manageable.

When it comes to lowlight, then yes the GH5S is better in lowlight than the a7Smk2 Especially in a practical sense as MFT sensor allows you to use faster lenses than would have been practical on the a7S. It really is pretty simple when you think about it & try it out.

Some of the Olympus Water proof cameras come to mind. Most really beautiful cameras are slipperier than a Catfish. Leica comes to mind. Sony RX100. Panny LX100 was a slippery little bastard. Nikon DF is ugly as shit. Sony Mavica with the Floppy Disk in it was no winner either, But I loved mine.

I believe the AJA camera uses exactly the same sensor as the BMD 4K one. Which was BMD's worst ever choice of sensor. Plus the very high cost of the AJA Cion at launch (relative to BMD with the same sensor), and a bunch of other quirks with it, set it back and the camera never took off. It is a pity, I'd have liked to have seen an AJA Cion mk2! But yes, it shows what you can do even with lower DR and terrible lowlight performance! Heck, even I'd rather shoot with a BMPC4K + URSA Mini 4K combo than shoot with one RED ONE MX. (which the two cameras together secondhand would cost similar, or less, as what a RED ONE does) Will be seriously putting forward this as a proposal for the feature film I might be shooting this year, as an alternative over the RED ONE (which unfortunately the director/producer has their heart set on! We have had a shoot already last month for this feature film with 2x RED ONE I was DoP for). I'll certainly have a few other suggestions up my sleeve as well to try and swing away from the RED ONE preference, such as Sony PMW-F3 or Sony FS700 4K raw output. (EVA1 + GH5S would be the dream! But probably way out of the budget)

A waterproof gimbal? Haha

Adam Wilt provides what I'd say is probably the best review of the camera. Not "best" as in positive. I mean "best" as in the most comprehensive without exaggerating the impact of its highlights or shortcomings. Just straightforward reporting of his findings. Definitely a worthy read for any owners or potential buyers. https://www.provideocoalition.com/review-panasonic-au-eva1-4k-cine-camera/

Correct!.... Sorry I was half asleep when I posted before. Yes, indeed the Tokina is a tad stronger...probably making the Minolta closer to the +0.33 power others have claimed. To be honest I personally consider them close enough in power for the two to be considered quite equal in terms of power and quality.

I doubt we'll see a GH6s for two years. GX95 this year, GH6 and G10 year after, GH6s year after that. I bet GH5s will be as nice paired with the GH6 as with the GH5. I think it will fill its niche for a good while to come.

Ok, you're quite the funny troll

I note better performance of GH5s at f5.6, 12800iso, rec709. Look at the massive artefacts, blocking on the A7s. Gruesome. So in some lowlight scenarios, one will fare better with the GH5s. Open in new tab for enlargement.

Just saw the asking price. m4/3 isn't what it used to be.

Thanks. The E-M1 has such nice ergonomics and Oly colours, and back then was the only player with IBIS which was great shooting on a rolling boat ?

I thought this one you did is really excellent! And on a EM1, I would have never guessed the camera!

I'm 56. I went to public schools in NYC in the late 70s. They had large populations of blacks, Puerto Ricans, and other minorities who had few opportunities in the white-collar world. Today, on YouTube, Marques Brownlee makes a living doing tech content, on his terms, in a way that was probably unthinkable to his parents when he was born. You also have Dagogo Altraide, of "ColdFusion" who has 1.5 million happy subscribers (like me). Or how about Olufemii? My guess is that 30 years ago there were few opportunities for @Oliver Daniel to do anything creative on his own in Manchester. If you were born 30 years ago what would you be doing then? I can get as upset about this stuff as you, like "Game of Thrones" which is on your quality list We all have different tastes. You haven't been on your forum much. You are EXCEPTIONALLY lucky that you have a platform/business in which you have some freedom of choice, freedom that is still not available to billions on this planet. If what you say is correct, and the World has totally lost it, then what hope for anyone? Do you think some young person, who finds his way to Berlin with dreams of making films, wants to read this stuff on EOSHD? That person is who you want to keep in the back of your head. Live and let live, Andrew. I strongly urge you to go watch the film "Sullivan's Travels" again to find your way back.

Just thought I’d point out that Facebook has invested over $1billion on new original content for their new Facebook Watch platform. We’re all capable of looking for what we want to see. It’s true that there’s a lot of trash on YouTube & co, but there’s trash absolutely everywhere. Always. Ignore.

My short documentary The Cloud of Unknowing, shot on 5D3 Magic Lantern, has been nominated for "Best British / Irish Short Film" by the London Film Critics' Circle. The awards ceremony is on January 28th... so fingers crossed for that! Here is a short extract from the film with some info about it: And here are some more details on the award nomination. http://www.iftn.ie/news/?act1=record&only=1&aid=73&rid=4291381&tpl=archnews&force=1 Thanks Magic Lantern!

GH5 at a friend's wedding. A little bit of grain, vignetting, lens blur and digital diffusion... plus a colour treatment based on my experiments with matching colour and contrast with Ektar 100 film.