Emanuel

Not easier not harder, it is only a matter of resolution : ) You meant sharpness as less cinematic, I guess? Well, I believe in the bigger you can get the little, otherwise, the reverse is much difficult to reach, isn't it?

Under certain circumstances, seems improved...

I guess people are demanding for the wrong settings I'd say... Take a 2nd look on it as said here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Lv7adPinHY&lc=z22nw1dqeqfpddynqacdp43a30qlxkbo4ggo3pb4nfhw03c010c "Are you using default settings?? You need to optimize it to be exactly perfect. Dont use the face recognizer.. use the single point on the middle and change the sensitive and speed reaction on it. And then, with the touch screen you can also choose the point to focus." In another note, another (usual) reviewer adds that: "One note I've learned is that autofocus on a subject that is standing still actually works better when the DOF is shallower (wide open aperture) than when the depth of field is deeper, f 3.5 and higher, the camera seems to hunt or pulse more often on a subject that's just standing still. I mention this because off the top of the video you made a comment that shallow depth of field is the hardest for the camera to autofocus with, and I just wanted to throw my experience out there, that shallow depth of field *has helped* autofocus for me, on non moving subjects." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptvfIX40_9s&lc=z23owpsxskigufgluacdp431bqfglq24d0pu2emivmpw03c010c

Easily to avoid it with the right settings though? Or not?

Moiré or aliasing?

Mais Doido Ainda, Still Further... ; ) you mean, Panasonic?

I'm guessing his rolleyes on Glenn's last entry... :-D

Jurek going on diopters: And another anamorphic sample, this one a 2x by another user really beautiful from this unique combos-maker:

Nice to know. WRT that 10-bit stuff, let's check such cloudy puzzle; interesting info FWIW. BTW, sent you a new PM @ your messages box.

Well, six months from now...

Not exactly underexpose by default but some underexposure techniques can help. As for instance, from what I've seen the GH5 footage can really shine especially if you have the highlights under control... What about your two cents?

LOL ;-)

I see rather the opposite. On the contrary, I don't see anything from others from same range (when not higher) you can't mimic (or even overcome) on GH5... And that includes Blackmagics. Show me something that may prove I am wrong ; ) To me, that's also the typical self-confidence attitude that you're able to get it better no matter what 'cause "I am or my camera is the one". A reverse of my neighbour's grass is greener. This is very human, but simply not science. I'm sorry but I only see subjectivity on GH5 criticism when not to justify why "I am not in the mood or don't want or simply won't buy the camera for whatever reason is" under different circumstances varying from case to case obviously; sorta non-investment excuse or alike. Also because I concur we all need to defend previous investments already done or recently made... Nothing more : ) Well, maybe only food for thought or just my two cents :-)

Dennis... this IS the camera we've been dreaming about for ages, I believe :-)

@tihon84 ;-)

Might they include some customization desqueeze feature I guess? ____ Yet, and from your review: "Shallow DOF is overrated because it covers up for a lack of good lighting and motion cadence. I’ve noticed a subtle interplay between motion cadence, shallow DOF and the film look. A shallow DOF can help to give you a three dimensional pop and film look with a LongGOP codec and hide the fact that 24p doesn’t really look like film 24fps. When you have true 24p and an ALL-I codec like on the GH5 with the 2.0 firmware update, you find yourself liking the look of deep focus more, because the movement isn’t as eye fatiguing and everything looks more film-like. If you have ever seen projected film from a Super 16mm camera you will know what I mean, it has a cinematic dreamy look that you don’t need an extreme shallow DOF to compensate for." Yeah, the results are always a commitment that works. Without the usual sugar, the sweet will variably have a different taste going on with some other attempt to figure out how to replace it. That is, we're speaking about something else, that's it.

https://youtu.be/_mB4RS1y8ok?t=575