Leaderboard

The video was shot with a single GH5 (with a little A6500 in there) in 10 hours, edited, graded and effects done in 4 days (by me). The new album (last I heard) was at No.7 in the official UK chart. I'm a big fan of what Panasonic has done with this camera. That said, the shining star of this video is the band.

"The sensor has about 11 megapixels according to the specification and is a Micro Four Thirds format (sensor size 17.3x13mm which means 4:3 aspect ratio). The specification says that only “10.28 Megapixels are active”, making the resolution about 3704×2778 if it’s 4:3. So the individual photo-sites must be about 4.7μm square, about the same as a conventional 3-sensor HDTV camera. Alan found that neither of these sets of dimensions was enough for 4096×2160 recording unless his assumptions are over-simplifications – which seems likely from the measurements above. ... The camera achieves HD Tier 1 because of the sensor size, while smaller than the preferred 1” size, is greater than the minimum-acceptable 2⁄3” size. The wording of R.118 is not completely consistent on this because testing is required whatever the sensor size, but the camera passes the tests anyway. ... It is also important for users to know that they can obtain more dynamic range shooting in the HLG or CineLike-D picture profiles than V-LogL. In saying that, V-LogL and HLG have a lot more dynamic range in the stops allocated above middle grey than CineLike-D. The amount of stops isn’t as important as where they are located above or below middle grey. Just because Cinelike-D has more DR than V-LogL doesn’t mean it’s a better picture profile to shoot in." The edifice of his research itself is wayyyyyyy off. It is NOT a 4/3 ratio sensor, and this is NOT the aspect ratio for 10.23 MP. They Are actually these: 3680 x 2760 (10.2 MP, 4:3), 3840 x 2560 (9.8 MP, 3:2), 4016 x 2256 (9.1 MP, 16:9), 2752 x 2752 (7.6 MP, 1:1), 2592 x 1944 (5.0 MP, 4:3), 2736 x 1824 (5.0 MP, 3:2), 2816 x 1584 (4.5 MP, 16:9), 1936 x 1936 (3.7 MP, 1:1), 1824 x 1368 (2.5 MP, 4:3), 1920 x 1280 (2.5 MP, 3:2), 1920 x 1080 (2.1 MP, 16:9), 1360 x 1360 (1.8 MP, 1:1), 3328 x 2496 (8.3 MP, 4:3), 3504 x 2336 (8.2 MP, 3:2), 3840 x 2160 (8.3 MP, 16:9), 2880 x 2880 (8.3 MP, 1:1) I am guessing the GH5s could have about 1/5 stop more dynamic range than the GH5 for raw, and less than that for video. Also, I doubt ANY camera can do 14.6 Stops in a 10-bit codec. I doubt even the highest grade ProRes 10-bit will reach 14.6 Stops. As a matter of fact, after this review, I am curious as to how many Stops of Dynamic Range the Alexas and REDs Achieve on their ProRes Codecs. Also, if this sensor were So Capable, Blackmagic would have advertised the 14.6 stops as the USP, above the Dual Native ISO. Also he says Cinelike-D has more dynamic range than Vlog. How? Take this review with a ping of salt. Or something stronger.

Yeah, that would be cool. People love to adapt the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8, but for many it's too cumbersome and kind of defeats the purpose of going with the more compact allowing ecosystem. Popular as well for the Samsung NX1 system was their S lens 16-50mm f/2-2.8. These are really the kind of lenses that are awesome! Now... Olympus has a good thing going for them with the f/2.8 PRO line-up. 7-14, 12-40 & 40-150mm. As Kisaha mentiones there's the nice 12-100mm f/4 PRO too. In turn Panasonic has the Lumix f/2.8 12-35 & 35-100mm and the Leica line-up of f/2.8-4 lenses. Apparently it is not that easy to create f/2.8 or faster zooms that are compact. There used to be one lens for 4/3 sensors... the Olympus M.Zuiko 14-35mm f/2.0 ED SWD. About the price of a kidney. Not compact either. Guess something we'd like to see... is just not in the stars.

The amazing Olympus 25/1.2 Pro with a Tiffen Black Pro Mist 1/4. The urge to invest in the 17/1.2 and the 45/1.2 keeps on growing

If you want to look at the a7riii as a S35 only video camera it has SEVERAL advantages over a6500 better ibis 2 hrs battery life no screen dimming best rolling shutter performance on any mirrorless cam better color science with HLG better 120fps 1080p My MENU function (create your own menu) better customizability with the buttons. more weatherproof

"GH5 V-Log and Hybid Log-Gamma are transformed to precisely match the color science of the Alexa, without compromise." "The GH Alex conversion completely transforms the GH5 image, addressing every nuance of color reproduction (from shadows to highlights, low saturation to high saturation, for every possible hue). This includes an organic rolloff which fully eliminates channel clipping." EmotiveColor.com PDF YouTube

Fast zooms are not as common as they should be. I wish there were like 2-3 zooms for the M43 ecosystem that could relieve filmmakers and photographers of the headache of constantly changing lenses to reframe shots. Also if they were Fast, low light wouldn't really be an issue. I wish Olympus and Sigma could perhaps collaborate on the following Zooms: 1. 12-25mm f2. 2. 24-50mm f2. 3. 45-100mm f2. Also if they could have good OIS and smaller sizes, along with being under $1500, it could be a runaway success. DO you think they should some other specifications for zooms in the M43 ecosystem? Or would you prefer constantly changing lenses?

A rant. I mostly shoot on DSLRs for my work. Got a big yesterday with a Sony FS7, big ass tripod, monitor, the works. Ohhhh fancy stuff by my standards! But here's the thing. It drove me nuts. Moving, positioning, getting shots was so damned cumbersome. Shot some Broll of a guy on a sailboat. I garauntee I could've gotten way more and frankly, way better and more interesting content with my trusty GH4 and gimbal. Blah blah specs, I don't care. Footage would've been nicer and more interesting to 100% of audiences. I know there'll be some "back in my day, cameras weighed 1000lbs" folks who will scoff, but you know what? Fuck large camera systems. Fuck them.

It is, indeed. Do not know about an offer, how much it cost now? I own the NX 16-50S which is 2-2.8f, so a 12-25mm 2f m43 isn't that amazing and unique, (2f-2.8f on an APS-C zoom lens that is 24-77mm equiv is truly unique, and happened 5 years ago). Using those classic workhorse lenses, you still need to go more Tele some times, while with the 12-100mm you have the full range for 95% of what a run and gun cameraman needs. 4f is not ideal of course, but with the dual ISO sensors won't be a big issue, and the lens is reasonably small and light as well.

I know that my favorite one for run and gunning is the Olympus 12-100mm 4f, hard to beat that, except in price.

Heh, yeah it really does. I know that a lot of members of this board will only shoot 4k 10 bit, and I get it, that's the same as Netflix wants, so there must have been some subjective research done to show that it's substantively a lot better. Maybe everyone else here has better eyesight than me and I'm on the wrong board. (Likely.) (Fwiw, I do think for HDR the 15 stop 4k 10 bit spec is spot on. But I'm not shooting HDR...) But I go on Vimeo and watch amateur videos and there isn't this sudden night and day difference once the GH5 or C200 hit. Even on Netflix (I don't have the 4k option on my account), I can't always tell what was acquired and finished at 2k and what's an original and finished at 4k 10 bit. Everything looks about the same to my untrained eye past a certain point. When it was the GH2 vs the 7D I saw a huge difference. The Alexa made a huge difference over the Red MX. And I've always loved the look of film and can spot it every time, but technically it's softer than most 1080p video, so that's just taste there, nothing to do with image quality but rather aesthetics. So maybe it's not that I don't care that much about image quality, I'm just blind to it. Time to get glasses maybe, or maybe brush up on technical comparisons, I guess. When I zoom in or pixel peep of course I can see the differences, but those seem to pale in comparison to aesthetic differences or just a good story. Probably just me.

"The camera achieves HD Tier 1 because of the sensor size, while smaller than the preferred 1” size, is greater than the minimum-acceptable 2⁄3” size. The wording of R.118 is not completely consistent on this because testing is required whatever the sensor size, but the camera passes the tests anyway." Huh?

Juicy...

Yes, I can see what you mean. When I posted I hadn’t given it much thought and really meant it was something that I personally wasn’t looking for. Certainly for more ‘professional’ type work I can see why people would want/need this.

I notice no discernible difference between my GH5 and GH5S. Honestly, they seem about the same. I would not let battery life be a deciding factor.

Cheers sir. I don't like everything about the aesthetic, however it's very liberating to be able to make great images with this camera. Plus the GH5 is good enough for the big guns. Arguing over which camera is best these days isn't even worth the debate.

And we didn't even get to come over a decision for this....

That's the sole reason I stopped visiting the site too. It smacks of too much bias. They have brands that they glorify, and others they try to run to the ground.

1,500 nits. Now you're talkin'.

One thing that you might watch out for is the resolution if you're planning on switching in and out of crop mode. With my 700D I found it has different resolutions available in crop mode vs normal mode, and when I set the resolution in one mode it was within the writing speed of my card, but then when I swapped crop modes it was over what I could write continuously. It seems to be that you can "choose" a resolution that's greater than what the camera can do and ML then uses the closest possible mode, which I found was different in crop vs non-crop modes. If you're taking lots of time between shots or if you're not maxing out your cards write speed then you're fine, although I'm not sure what people do when they can't shoot in the resolution they're outputting in. With the 700D I'm shooting in something like ~1700 pixels wide and outputting in 1920 wide so perhaps slight changes in resolution don't matter as much because I'll be scaling up anyway, but your situation might be different. Downscaling is probably fine too. In terms of crop mode being a Killer Feature it might sway me into buying a 5DIII in order to have it. My camera options are currently: The first option is the XC10 which I already own, which has high bitrate 4K video, a long zoom, great ergonomics and battery life, good image stabilisation, but doesn't do shallow depth of field. The second option is the 700D with Sigma 18-35 f1.8 that I also already own, which has RAW in ~1700 pixels wide (possibly more with the SD controller hack), with crop mode it is reasonably long zoom range, does shallow depth of field spectacularly well, but doesn't have as good ergonomics and has no image stabilisation. My alternatives to the above are that I could sell them and get a BMPCC 4K, 5DIII or 80D with ML, A7III, or whatever else has been released by the end of the year. I'm in Italy for a month later in the year and was planning on taking the XC10 and 700D so will be able to put them both through their guerrilla film-making paces and really get to know them both. I've shot a few trips with the XC10 (maybe 20 days filming total) and it feels familiar and comfortable in the hand, but haven't used the 700D / ML in the wild yet. Considering that I'd basically have to sell everything and start again with a new camera & lens system for most of the above it's not a decision I'll be making quickly or without proper testing and evaluation.

Thanks so much!!! You are awesome, Dave!!! Majority of my work is stills and I know it has some advantages in terms of stills as well (mainly, for my purpose, the 1/250th flash sync speed and the EVF in the middle of the body, since I am left eye dominant). Also, for my work, using a crop-sensor lens and having ONLY 18MP stills instead of the 24MP of the a6500 is actually a good thing for me. Thanks again.

Camera shake is a lot more noticeable for sure. I don't know of any other issues with it but I haven't used it much yet so YMMV. I doubt it's relevant to most people, but be aware that changing the resolution also changes the crop factor, but this is true in either crop or normal mode.

The recent announcement of the BMPCC 4K has prompted me to do a lot of thinking about cameras in general and what features are useful etc, and I've realised that ML RAW has a killer feature that seems to be relatively unique - the 3x Crop mode. Is anyone else finding the crop mode to be a big differentiator against other cameras? It turns my Sigma 18-35 on my 700D into a 29-56mm and 87-168mm lens, which combined with the fact it switches with only a single menu option change, and doesn't require the purchase / carrying / changing of additional lenses, makes it a hugely competitive feature IMHO. I know this is only in ~1080 and not 4K, but the fact it's RAW goes somewhat to making up for this when compared to cameras that compress their 4K output. I suppose with something like the BMPCC 4K you could just record RAW and then crop in post, but you'd be throwing away a lot of data in post. In theory, a 32MP (or above) sensor can have a 2x (or more if greater than 32MP) crop and still have enough pixels for 4K. It would be great if someone used a 50MP sensor and had a 4K pixel binning mode for the full sensor, and then a 2.5x crop mode for a 1:1 pixel 4K mode, but I suppose all the manufacturers would rather sell you more lenses than add the flexibility.

Well, despite this forum’s name, there is an anti-Canon bias running rampant on these pages. But if you go on Instagram, you will see a slew of Canon video users. If you go to trade shows, you will see Canon cameras working the show floor. If you attend weddings, the lion’s share of videographers use Canon. If you follow vlogs, the majority are shot with Canon. Only in forums like this is Canon a bad word. With working professionals, Canon cameras are workhorses. @kye

I recommend David Lynch's Inland Empire. Shot on Sony PD-150s with noise and blown highlights everywhere, but it works for the surreal horror vibe of the film and shows that the ugly imperfections of DV can make for a pretty special look.

If there’s a market for it, Canon will make it. Like every other company, Canon exists to make a profit.

In addition to my previous post, a good way to think about efficiency is that it's like a relay race where the baton is passed from person to person. The largest issue in productivity is when the baton either isn't passed properly "I thought you had it... I didn't realise you were waiting for me..." or the person who is meant to take it isn't ready yet. Obviously there are situations where it's not a straight pass between people/departments, the easiest example of that is "ready on set" where everyone has to be ready for a take, however you will find that there is only one critical path / sequence of activities that starts when the director says "cut" and takes longer than everything else that needs to be done between takes or setups. Having an AD / Director that understands the sequences of what is happening, the dependencies between them, and then continually monitors everyone on set to ensure the baton gets passed cleanly and there are no delays is how you get efficient. The "appearance" of what people are doing on set can be important too, if the client is there, but don't confuse that with efficiency. If you can, educate the client so that they can see that the baton is being passed efficiently around, but if not then manage things however you must, but be clear that managing a client who cannot see if a set is efficient or not is something that doesn't effect the final work, and what effects the work won't be visible to the client.

Large camera. Wide lens mount. So I suppose it’s possible if that’s your thing...

Spread the love, not the hate! Take the victories as they come knowing you can't win all the fights (and some aren't worth stepping in the ring for). The world is too big to make everyone happy, so whatever you do, do it for yourself and don't be bothered too much with what others think. Seen you and Albert Fast do great things with the new Olympus Pro f/1.2 optics and I appreciate the willingness to share your findings with us!

Tascam DR100mkii and DR680 that I hope it will go to retire soon!

I have a Tascam DR60 mk2. I'm very happy with it.

i think banning phones is going to make people hate you, so Id just ask for phones to be on silent, making the point that some boogeyman producer wants NO PHONES AT ALL, but i thought that was unreasonable. see im nice ?

If you're hiring people who you can't trust to keep their phones from ruining takes, then you need to ask yourself why -- not to treat crew like school kids. If I've caught up on what I need to do and I'm ready to roll at a moments notice, but we're just waiting for one thing or another, I see no reason why I shouldn't check my email. Besides the fact that quick responses to emails gets you more work, I wouldn't work for a producer who can't trust me to know when I should look at my phone or not. Also, if you see the time you pay as "your time", then it's your responsibility to make sure that there is as little down time as possible. If you can't keep your crew occupied, then that's your fault, and it's frankly unreasonable to demand your crew not check in on the state of their own business when they have nothing else to do.

This is where I have face palm every-time someone says it's the same sensor and then go onto extrapolate on why the images aren't (or are! ) the same. There's so many things about how you set up the sensor, from how fast you clock it to what other behind the scenes image processing and pre processing you're doing. JB

Sad to see that Cinema5D is still spreading their damage even today. That review in particular along with many others is one reason why I just stopped reading Cinema5D. Wonder how many sales of the Samsung NX1 that Cinema5D caused damage to?

I beg to disagree.. while every camera will handle things differently, the XT2 is the first camera that consistently nails just about any artificial/mixed lighting i've thrown at it.. inversely, Sony's tend to always have this ugly yellow cast (A7S was greenish) that requires fixing in post. it's no secret and as you know Andrew has made extensive examples displaying zombie skin tones and such in his EOS profile promos.. i don't know another camera brand with such wacked out SOOC color science..

Exactly the point of my post.