sanveer

Actually the difference between the 4k and 4.6k sensor was HUGE. 3 stops (or more) of dynamic range difference. And hence the 2k price difference (maybe more now?).

The lens causes the sensor to have a lot of crop, and that is why despite being a 16MP sensor, its highest resolution is limited to 12.7MP (in the 4:3 aspect ratio). I am guessing it was designed by Panasonic to actually compete with the 1inch sensors by offering a fast lens and slightly larger sensor, despite the crop from the M43 sensor size. Despite the low MP count, it seems to have worked quite well.

Hahaha. Maybe $1999 if it is one lens (f2.8 12-100mm) to rule them all then all. I feel that Olympus lenses have letter optics than Panasonic's which correct a lot of flaws by way of internal processing instead of making better lenses. Actually I am guessing the GH series cameras are getting huge due to 3 reasons: 1. Unlimited Recording, 2. 5-Axis OIS, and most importantly 3. Due to having 10-bit recording without having heat issues thay come with it and without having a fan or other things. The tiny size of the Sonys had ensured that they have overheating issues (they have dealt with it by having much better processors and I am guessing some superb built-in heat sink in models such as the A7iii), disappointing OIS (especially noticeable while walking), and over sized lenses (especially some of the good G Master ones). The NX1's ergonomics are soemthing different. The grip of the body itself is so well curved. Which is one aspect most companies wither don't design well, or don't improve with subsequent models. I think lens manufacturers should also be asked by CIPA to state their levels of IS compensation in exact stops.

After doing a little bit of research, I discovered that while there is a site comparing most Amatuer and Prosumer Cameras (https://camerasize.com/compare/), there appear to be none that compare Camera Lens sizes (except one that matches M43 cameras with lenses for relative look and size estimations http://four-thirds.org/en/special/matching.html). There is a strange presumption that lenses must remain small at the cost of faster glass or great options, and this applies to Panasonic too. Olympus has been shamelessly making some superb glass and some of it is pretty small too, especially for the quality and brightness that it offers. If Samsung could make f2-2.8 (16-50mm) Zooms, there is no reason Panasonic should not aim for Zooms that start brighter than f2.8 (Panny Leica f2.8-4 12-60mm). I saw the Zuiko f2 Zooms and they are absolutely enormous. Panasonic should aim for a combination of bright and decent range, even if it means a little large lens (not as enormous as the Zuiko f2 zooms). I don't like variable zooms, cause they suddenly feel weird if you don't close the aperture to begin with, and then zoom in. A 12-100 versions of the stellar Olympus f4 zoom, but with an f2.8 lens would be perfect. It could be large. This single lens could outsell everything but the M43 system if it has good OIS and isn't priced above $1499.

Basically what Apple seems to be doing is putting the various flavours of RAW in its own wrapper and charging a fee for it. Adding no extra value to the RAW (most likely), causing issues with software (like DaVinci) recognising the kinds of RAW codecs, based on the various kinds of RAW programs and cameras that use these various codecs, unlocking them to their individual potentials. It's like a blanket standard with no individual specification to individual cameras. Basically it is Not a new RAW standard or codec. It basically is just a Alpha or Beta version of a new standard, which still has a very long way to go before it figures out what it brings to the table. I also suspect that it has some monopolistic practice involved in decoding this RAW that will affect all NLEs. And Apple is shamelessly assuming that they will get away with creating it. I see the other editing suites collaborating to get back at Apple (maybe isolate ProRes?).

I realised that while this test may be borderline ludicrius regarding actual dynamic range, it does highlight certain very interesting facts and even maybe give us a hint or two about the present and future developments in the GH line of cameras and their capabilities. "Like 709 10.3 HLG 14.6 V-LogL 13.5 CineLike-D 13.9 ... Note that these figures are a little speculative and subjective: it is up to the user to decide whether the performance at the extreme ends of the dynamic range are acceptable, thus there is an uncertainty of about 1 stops in all these results. Neither of these sets of dimensions is enough for 4096x2160 recording unless my assumptions are over-simplifications – which seems likely from the measurements above." He claims the HLG has 14.6 stops of dynamic range. The CameraStoreTV guys (who are now on DPReview) said that Panasonic reps told them that HLG has a little more dynamic range than VLog, which could make sense since Vlog L, the one used on the GH cameras is capped at 12 stops and below. I also remember someone mentioning (in a DVD Forum?) about 11.63 or so stops, measured for Vlog on the GH5s. If that is the case, then the guy is off by approx 1.87 stops or so (13.5 - 11.63). If that is the case then 14.7 - 1.87 (the stops by which it is off) is about 12.73 stops (or a little less). Wide Dynamic Range is a common rant mentioned in all the Sony Sensor Literature on the Sensor. Also, BMPCC 4k mentions 13 stops of dynamic range (I am guessing it should be around 13 stops -/+ a third of a stop). If that be the case, then it is time Panasonic redo the Vlog L (and push it for 13 stops, instead of capping it at 12 stops). The 12 stops limit, may be the sole reason the GH5s doesn't seem to have more dynamic range in 10-bit 4-2-2. Panasonic were probably too lazy to improve the Vlog, apart from wanting to save their more expensive cameras. And since the GH5 according to DXO does 13 stops in RAW photo, the Vlog seems to be a similar version of the GH4 which hasn't been improved in dynamic range since then.

Seriously Kickass !!! Thanks for sharing this information.

Cause with a boom pole you STILL have to attach he mic to wires, to the recorder. Which means you are carrying a bag with the recorder. Which is superb for reviewing the quality of the recording at real time (via headphones), but the setup could be smaller and more portable.

Hahaha. Let me Clarify. I meant I wish there was a Mic that was super long and L-shaped ( like a metre long witj a bendable section, eliminating the need for an additional for an additional boom pole). And I wish such a mic could be used with DR10X for recording sound. Right now it can't power mics so shotguns are out of the question (except perhaps mics like the NTG2 and other mics which have internal battery). I am guessing the signal to noise ratio must be also low.

Interesting. How about a faster version of the 12-100 f4 with a little bit of the range shaved off? Like, perhaps a 12-60 f2.8? It could be mildly bigger to accomodate the extra light gathering.

It's a superb lens. And there was an offer on it recently (dunno if its still on, I saw it on 43rumors.com)

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?

Lots of Zoom H1s (for reference and ambient sound to dialogues via lapel mics, it's super cheap and quite tiny), Zoom H5 (mostly for the shotgun mic) on small budget shorts. On large budget features I guess lots of different brands (the sound guys have their own brands, though sound devices seem very popular). I would love to use the Tascam DR 10L and DR10X (I wish it had a long L shaped mic that could be used with it for booming) kind of recorders. Maybe I pick up those or the Zoom F1. I love the Instamic concept. I wish they could bring the mic quality up to the level of the HTC10 and LG V30, and also have a lapel mic in option along with auto sync. It's superb in terms of size and the concept is genuinely progressive.

EXACTLY. A 1 inch sensor is 16mm Diagonal, whereas the GH5s sensor is 21.63 mm Diagonal. How could it then, possibly, be smaller than a 1inch sensor??? The guy who has reviewed it, obviously did no research at all, and despite almost every fact being incorrect, he arrives at a conclusion which he believe to be of great accuracy. He doesn't even know the specifications of the sensor, leave alone the exact number of pixels on it in different modes (which Panasonic itself shared in various literature). Suddenly, after seeing this one, one would wonder how off the mark, the rest of his results are (with regard to the other cameras mentioned). It is one thing to get a conclusion incorrect, but a Totally Different thing to start on a Completely Erroneous Footing. This is the site that came up with: https://tech.ebu.ch/publications/tech3335 This reminds me of one of Murphy's famous laws (on experts): "An expert is a person who avoids the small errors while sweeping on to the grand fallacy." - Weinberg's Corollary

Excellent. What's more even impressive is the turn around and how it was shot. Please share details of lighting and setup. Thanks in advance.

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.

"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.

They probably made 2 production versions of the 5d3. One for you, and one for everyone else.

Firstly this review was with the old firmware and Samsung addressed most of the issues with the later firmware. The credibility of Cinema5D is probably less than Mata Hari the double agent. And their ability to take criticism is worse than Uwe Boll. The sheer number of rude comments on this very post of Cinema5D highlights the very problem with brazenly biased reviews. They wrote a scathing initial review of the GH5 too calling the Vlog a joke or unusable or something on those lines. I believe Panasonic threatened to sue, so they took down their article to re-write It, removing all the vitriolic rubbish that had made itself to the initial review. This kind of shamelessly biased writing dismisses any hope of credibility. That's more than a lot of full frames of that time (including the 5D Mark ii and iii).

Actually the 5D Mark ii and iii had pretty low dynamic range (lower than the Panasonic GH5 cameras at base ISO). And let's not forget the soft HD for video. Evey camera has its issues and limitations, somr way more than others.

I wrote to one of the biggest 3D manufacturers out there. And I guess it's just a terrible rumour. As, arguably, the sharpest mind (and one of the sharpest wits too) on the forum implied, speed would be a factor for 3D Printing. It would havr delays running into decades ? Actually it may be possible that the sensor as way too many crop factor and resolution combinations. Since it is a 14-bit sensor, I won' be surprised that in one of such combinations it does 14-bit RAW at 4k or cinema 4k too.

Wow. You did cover some very important questions.

I am curious, does anyone know the Exact size of the GH5s sensor? Someone on DVD Forum claimed it was 17.8x10mm, but that aspect ratio seems VERY strange. The sensor on the BMPCC 4k is 18.96mm x 10mm as stated on its own site. Sony states that it's IMX294 sensor has a Diagonal Measurement of 21.63 mm (which is in the 17:9 ratio. So, effectively the sensor on the BMPCC 4k is an off the rack Sony IMX294 sensor. Which curiously seems to be the same sensor on the GH5s as well as the Z Cam E2. But, the GH5s seems to have uncropped HD at almost 200fps, and then after that it seems to crop in for higher frame rates (please correct me if I am wrong). Whereas, on the BMPCC it claims not to crop in at upto 100 fps or so, and then it crops in. How is it possible that 2 different ratios exist for the same sensor?

The NX1 Mark ii would be the most important and wanted camera ever. It would, presumably, Again, redefine photography and videography in a Camera, if it ever hit shelves. This topic is both so Relevant and Divided, that we should have a Regulated Wager on this one. Andrew should probably hold bets on both sides of argument. It would be fun. Should we start with a Poll?

'Not at the moment' is what one of the Blackmagic guys said at NAB.