dbp

I know it uses GPU more, but it still relies heavily on CPU for rendering. I just switched from a GTX 570 1.2gb to a GTX 1060 6gb and my render times with HD pocket raw footage increased exactly 0%.

Seems like editing is way more CPU heavy and less GPU heavy than gaming. Storage speed and RAM are also a lot more important for editing. Gaming really has become a GPU fest. Which is nice, makes it easy in a way.

ahhh good memories

Yep, pretty much thinking the same!

That is a fine case!

I am the same, been building my own. I used to do a big upgrade like clock work every 3 years since 2001. This has been the longest I've gone without one (5 years). Harder to afford for me now. Would need a new cpu/mobo/ram/gpu at this point. Definitely on my list of priorities. Thinking about getting a better fan to at least overclock my 2600k but I dunno if I can be bothered. Buying a 1060 6gb in a few days to at least help with the 4k instability.

I know I've been putting off editing system upgrades in favor of lenses and lights, but I think it's time to pay some much needed attention to the ol' girl.

Nice! I'm still using an old sandy bridge 2600k and I need an upgrade. My card is a gtx570 with 1.2gigs of ram, so it's always crashing and causing problems with 4K footage.

Wouldn't surprise me. I've noticed that trend of 60p autofocus being better, usually much better, with every camera I've owned.

Just a general observation I've noticed with GH5 videos so far. Many of them seem to be shot at 60p. I wonder if that framerate slowly end up becoming more popular.

Cool stuff! Nature footage is something the GH5 excels at I think. IBIS, compact, easy to get a long zoom range with m43, 4K 60p.

Looks absolutely lovely. Something about the 5D raw gives me the warm fuzzies haha

Most of my wedding venues, I'm at iso 1600 usually on f1.8-2. Every now and then I'm up to iso3200. A clean iso 3200 would solve most wedding woes for me, but the GH4 certainly isn't there.

True, but they don't have to watch *everything*, they just have to stop automatically allowing ads once you pass basic viewer number thresholds. Make it a privilege. Honestly, part of me is happy about this. Youtube was becoming this junky clickbait, desperate for views cesspole. I feel bad for those working hard to provide genuinely valuable content, but fuck those clowns who are just churning out boring "ohhhh so edgy" nonsense for money.

Auto focus killed my sister and ruined my marriage!

Man, I must say, a few years ago I would have never guessed that auto focus of all things would be such a heated debate topic on these forums!

Watch it full screen, it's not there. An artifact of a youtube embed.

Even on an 8bit monitor, you will see the differences with gradients and transitions between colors. There's been tests out there that demonstrate this with the GH5, no pixel peeping required.

Interesting, GH5 seems to have a similar magenta tint that I see in GH4 stuff often.

Definitely. I am ok shooter, ok editor (being generous). I know little about grading or doing audio well. My skills have absolutely not outgrown my GH4 or pocket. but gear talk is fun dammit!

I'm with ya on liking cinematic looks over something too digital. I just found the AF100 highlight clipping was unpleasant and definitely screamed video to me. The color science was pretty blah as well. So was the GH2 color, for that matter. It just seemed better. Good 1080p is fine by me, I don't care that much about 4K. It's all about color and dynamic range for me. I realize that color in particular is subjective, so to each their own. 96fps mode is pretty crappy. I'll use it for the effect, but it's a noticeable drop off. Better than not having the option at all and I applaud Panasonic for at least offering 180fps. Interesting anecdote and not all that surprising. 5D3 raw and c100 II both consistently look great.

Sharpness isn't always better, agreed. There's a threshold to where stuff is too soft for my taste. Early Canon stuff and the AF100 would fall in that camp. I've seen comparisons between the two and the GH2 was always a bit sharper, and looked better. Especially with blown out spots. AF100 would go orange and cyan in the highlights. Once the GH2 got the hack, the differences in compression artifacts became apparent as well. GH2 was definitely a better sensor and I'd wager many more would agree with me. I was following the discussions here, on DVXuser and hack forum quite regularly. Alexa absolutely resolves more detail than the AF100. I would call it a camera capable of very sharp images if so desired. AF100, not so much.

Honestly, I think what killed it was the IQ. It just wasn't that great. The much cheaper GH2 was better. A bit sharper and handled highlights better. Then the hack hit and it was all over. On paper, it should've been a killer, but the look/mojo wasn't there for people coming from 5Ds, etc. I don't blame them. M43 lens selection was definitely lacking compared to what it is now, too.

I don't think the AF-100 sold that well. Still though, an updated effort might do better. It's probably the only request I've seen more than a new version of the blackmagic pocket, so there's clearly demand for it.

I go back and forth between raw and pro res on the pocket. Pro Res is really really good, but ultimately raw is where it's at. I know one test showed 1.5 stops of dynamic range improvement, and I'd believe it based on experience. Not worrying about white balancing, being able to shove the footage around in CC. It used to really impractical but not so much anymore. Compatiable SD cards have fallen and resolve runs quite well even on my ancient machine. 4K raw would be another story I'm sure.