Emanuel

Glad to finally see it :-)

What do they have in common? The set? ; ) Apples to oranges here as far as aesthetics concerns... And naturally, I don't even mean the acquisition side, really ;-) (some dozens of thousands in-between don't make much of that difference, subject-wise, like it or not : ) I guess, both of them (a short-film-test vs just-a-test, by this chronological order) match the market segments within. Some fairness on the tools, after all :-)

Got your point. Not a youtuber here, though. To my eyes, it simply fits the subject.

Lovely shots, competently photographed and edited.

That video was not representative then, once that's high ISOs domain, much noisy than a cleaner output on less sensitive realm. I haven't found much trouble from 8-bit 4:2:0 when well exposed other than banding, the truly embarrassing hassle to fit low bit rates.

Actually, high ISOs ain't nothing recommendable at all on GH series, even sensor size apart... BTW, neither Blackmagics.

Well said. The benefit can be mostly testified at the big screen.

Your bets for tonight?

IMHO, the trouble on this camera is far beyond to be... 10-bit 4:2:2 LOL but latitude, DR. A few samples clearly show it. Once again, on the shooter... Nothing more, period. (even the high ISOs coupled to denoising attempts by the camera maker to mimic larger sensor size competition can be disappointing but it is meaningless...) C'mon, that's ridiculous! Anyways, only talent will be the last frontier. Never these devices of nowadays, at this level. End of story :-)

: D Well pointed out :-)

I always appreciate to know the camera I work with... call me picky (not necessarily pixel peeper : D all the time, at least hehe) I recall the finest example that our woman is always the most attractive female for us or it should be ;-)

Nope. rAw, RaW, raW, rAW or yet RAw like IMDb, no other :-P

by James Miller GH5 Stabilizer handheld test with a Zeiss Otus 85mm showing: 1/ No Stabilization 2/ Sensor Stabilisation when set to the mm of the lens including reduction for the Speedbooster .71x 3/ As no. 2 but with in camera electronic stabilization active.

;-) And... here's a good kit for those worried about ergonomics based on DSLR/mirrorless cameras: http://www.woodencamera.com/panasonic-gh4-gh5-camera-accessory-kit-pro-guide-s/322.htm Hey guys, no mention on film, cinematography and so on but there's something written right there to guarantee is PRO!

What's the beef with the form factor of a GH5 camera for a feature film...!?? Certain stuff with ergonomics to be a catch for filmmaking in a set of a feature is yet beyond me... Still waiting for a reasonable explanation enough to drive me quiet.

Pretty useful tool... Indeed. James is tiptop, much beyond the average beta tester we're used to cross with.

Yeah, denoising, very likely, once the source seems reliable at least: http://www.osamuhasegawa.com/ And fairly promising:

All of those. Placed my pre-order for two GH5 units with CVP, by the way. In Germany the best is: https://www.marcotec-shop.de/de/ But, I can send you information on a few other small ones, top reliable at best. Send me a PM as you need :-)

Ditto. Where fast glass + accurate exposure are keys -- between 400 and 800 ISO:

I don't think better chroma subsampling or color depth will help it at all. To be 4:2:0 or 4:2:2, 8-bit or 10-bit may end the same for that purpose, I bet. I wouldn't say the same about bitrate, though. As well, post tools and other tricks as you mentioned and I had posted in that video two posts earlier. As same as other resources. Let's stay at optical 'improvement' period for the subject matter, I guess ;-) Take a look in the differences from 1600 to 3200 ISO, so the secret with this device is to keep it under control. Actually, as happens with all cameras. With a difference here: up to ISO1600 for acceptable response.

Motion can be a bit different of it, maybe less noticeable but hardly easier.

Yes, as said in the first post. I'd actually love to confirm our best hopes may happen. I'm afraid the things can only be worse, though. Video versus stills...?? I'm really sorry. IMHO seems more a PITA if there's another girl to pick up in a special dating; unless bitrate (more than 10-bit as I recall an old discussion with you some time ago) + a change on their approach to the whole high ISOs processing thing could save the grace, if not, a pity as first call. Well, good lighting seems pretty recommendable and truly fair. Otherwise, no way. Light is always key, even for low light and use of high ISO settings, I do bet and stand because we all know photography will never be made of only a bit of the cake but everything must count there. May motion be a bit different of it. Here goes a sample of that, including post: