Leaderboard

Sorry, I wasn't suggesting that the BBC was doing run & gun that would use a GH2. I was only responding to the implication that the GH2 would be a poor choice for a documentary. 😄

All modern cameras have good colors. It's all comes down to filming and post production.

Guys I'm with you but a BBC doc is not "run & gun". Quite the opposite.

The BBC exists in a different production and financial context than independent documentaries. Even there, if the option was to capture something on a GH2, or not get it at all, they'd choose the GH2. Lucky for them, they don't have to worry about that.

It shouldn't be beyond the means of Panasonic to create a hotshoe mounted 9 axis IMU that embeds the data in the files via BLE so you can have the option of both. The drawback to the L mount series is how few optically stabilised lenses there are for it as well. Baffles me that Sigma in particular don't make any (other than the 100-400) with OIS as if there is any camera in L mount that could do with a helping hand regarding stabilisation it is their own ones. All of it just emphasises how nothing beats a tripod. IBIS means we can stick it to the man by snatching shots where tripods would likely be unable to be used but if the end result is irreparable warping then its a pyrrhic victory really isn't it.

s5 with helios 58mm static shots seems fine to my eyes.

Yes but this is not true. Undone has always found something to say to fault Panasonic in the past, like he did with the reviews of the 10-25mm saying the 18-35mm had better AF ... And saying the S1 IBIS is much better than the S5 without even comparing them to Sony cameras is doubtful to say the least, especially when he was the first to say the AF was much better on Sony than on panasonic (which was true). Both the S1 and S5 are very comparable for IBIS. The S1 is very slightly better. Even with a 85mm lens, I must really looking closely to see the difference with IS BOOST enabled. An exemple : When walking there is a bit more "jump" on the S5, but the difference is very slight. I used and still use the S1 and S5 a lot and they are really close. I saw some comments saying the S1H had better IBIS than the S1 but I never made a comparison with both so I don't know. The real upgrade was with the S5II, especially when walking, the S5II is noticeably better than the S1 and S5 but it can sometimes look more "digital". By exemple when shooting in 6K or Open Gate with a 85mm and IS BOOST, the S5II seems a bit more stable than the S1, but when cropping I can see a bit more micro jitters on the S5II like if the S5II was applying a stronger correction. This make me think the S5II uses more processing power for the IBIS, and maybe lower the overall image quality compared to the S5 and S1. However when walking, the S5II is clearly better past 24mm, both the S5 and S1 show visibly more "jump". I suppose we can't get a more perfect camera till Panasonic will drastically change the processor and the sensor of their full frame cameras (they still use the same Sony sensor from 2018).

Could be... I think my S1H had better IBIS than my OG S5, but the S5ii has better IBIS than the S1H...which is to be expected because it's a much more recent camera. OM-1 was really good...

Yeah, that's terrible, and not easy to correct in post at all. I am wondering when the camera manufacturers and/or post people will get their act together and start addressing these distortions - if they profile a lens then it should be 99% fixable, either in-camera via processing or in-post using gyro and IBIS + OIS alignment data, or simply a more sophisticated stabilisation algorithm than a 2D crop of the final image. It doesn't even have to be perfect, an 80-90% reduction in the flappiness would be - well - 5-10x better. I mean, if a GoPro can do it for one lens, essentially perfectly, then it can't be beyond a multi-thousand dollar professional camera body with a native lens.

It's a big "it depends", based on lots of factors: Some scenes are more difficult technically to capture than others Some scenes are more difficult aesthetically to reproduce than others Some differences can be compensated for in post easily (e.g. small WB differences, skin tone hue rotations, etc) Some differences can't be compensated for (e.g. skin tone smoothing, quantisation issues like 8-bit log codec, lots of non-linear processing) The stronger the grade you're going to put on it the less it matters The more skilled you are in post the less it matters The more powerful the tools you use in post the less it matters The better the cameras colour profiles are the less it matters The less picky your audience is the less it matters The less saturated the final image the less it matters Etc The problem with discussing it is that on the open internet, the only two opinions anyone seems to understand is "it is the only thing that matters" or "it doesn't matter at all", and those who dare to look in the middle ground can't tell which of the strange things in the test images belong to which camp - easy or difficult or impossible to fix.

He also said the IBIS in Open Gate and 4k have the same performance, but on his GH7/G9II video he only tested a 8mm lens but even my A7IV has a not so bad IBIS at 16mm. Owning the GH6 and G9II, the difference in IBIS performance is obvious while walking with most lenses.

I use my S5ii's with default settings without CAF, but with face & eye switched on. Zero AF issues and I rely on my AF a lot of the time.

Shooting with the S5ii a few days ago with the 20-60mm I was noticing some weirdness from the IBIS in terms of distortion and wondering whether its interacting (badly) with the lens correction for barrel distortion. These are two consecutive frames and there is a tiny horizontal change which the IBIS is correcting but its causing quite a distortion on the edges. Its subtle but its very noticeable on the building on the right. However, when you do a difference action between the two frames you can really see how it is spreading the distortion from the centre (where its barely anything) outwards.