jonpais

Some swear by charts. Others by counting nits. Still others by shooting in a dimly lit room with a bright window and pulling up shadows or pulling down highlights. But I can just about guarantee that whichever method you use, the difference will be negligible when compared to viewing footage from your present camera on a decent display. In the YouTube HDR thread, someone mentioned that colorists over at liftgammagain scoffed at the idea of using an Inferno as a reference monitor, but I think they would be just as horrified to see what many are using to grade their SDR content.

Did you even watch the video I just posted?

Imatest would be definitive, as ‘real world’ tests aren’t repeatable. fwiw, I could detect no appreciable difference in this comparison, already posted, when viewed on my 2017 27” iMac. And while Mystery Box, who were paid by Panasonic to promote the GH5s for HDR delivery - which happens to be their specialty - claim 16 stops of dynamic range when counting nits on their scopes, they take pains to point out that 3-4 of those may be too noisy. In another first, they also point out that incorrect exposure and white balance will result in further loss of dynamic range. At times, when pressed on the issue of V-Log L and its supposed cap at 12 stops, they resort to saying, “well that’s what the engineers (at Panasonic) told us”. So I would be very skeptical of claims of 14 stops of dynamic range. Furthermore, even after a reviewer ultimately posts Imatest results online, readers will bicker loudly, insisting that the reviewer knows nothing, and that they can clearly see 14 or more clearly differentiated bands from pure white to black, but just viewing a chart on a 2012 MacBook Air with a lousy internet connection doesn’t tell the whole story. Finally, anyone who seriously believes this issue will be resolved need only take the GH5 as example - even one year after its release, no two sane people can agree what the true DR of the camera is! I'll take it one step further and recommend bypassing the GH5s altogether and spending your hard earned money on an LG OLED TV instead - only then will you be able to appreciate just how fine a camera the GH5 really is - while at the same time revealing the shortcomings of video graded in rec. 709.

YT did not censor the video. Anybody that wishes to may view it.

frustrating that not a single person seemed at all interested in Mystery Box’s extremely detailed blog post about grading HDR, just question after question about dynamic range. You don’t necessarily have to be ready to grade and deliver in HDR to take an interest in the workflow. I take an interest in just about anything having to do with filmmaking. And while I’m discovering that HDR is turning out to be more expensive than I thought at first, I find it ironic that everyone is only concerned about capturing 14 stops of dynamic range but satisfied with delivering six or whatever. To me, it’s like having spent my entire life listening to harpsichord music and being introduced to the piano. just my two cents

Thanks, @Cinegain

I’m not seeing any specs...

and the reason for posting a link to imdb is...?

That Rothschild video is worthless conspiracy theory bs. It begins by labeling the family fake Jews and goes on to suggest they were somehow behind the assassination of Abraham Lincoln! Vile rubbish.

Well, it’s not always just the tripod you’re dealing with, for one thing. When I’ve got a hefty tripod head and a slider on there, it can get a little unwieldy trying to raise or lower the legs by your lonesome, and I usually have an assistant do it for me. Latches at the top would be much simpler.

“Buy one camera to shoot handheld, and another one to shoot in low light? Who in their right mind would want to do that?” ?

ISO 400 is considered to be base ISO on the GH5, afaik.

@Emanuel So are you saying that at ISO 1600, noise, color and dynamic range of the GH5s should be as good as ISO 400 on the outdated GH5?

Lie is a strong word, but I think you're right, they do tend to exaggerate their ISOs as well.

With the GH5, some photographers would say that ISO 1600 is usable, others ISO 3200. A very few would even argue that ISO 6400 is usable. Now, with the GH5s, reviewers who've had a chance to shoot with the pre-production model are claiming anywhere from 1-1/2 - 3 stops improvement. But seldom do reviewers talk about the relationship between noise and how you intend to deliver your video. Looking at the master file of my most recent video for example, shot with the GH5 - mostly at ISO 400-500 - the image looks pretty good on my 27" 5K iMac. If I look carefully at things like walls in the picture, I can see noise, but it's nothing overly distracting. But upon examining the same video uploaded to YouTube, the noise is already starting to detract from my enjoyment of the image. If I just look at the walls or the sky in some shots, it looks like swarms of tiny insects crawling around or something. If I were to say, invite someone over to watch some of my clips, I'd definitely want them to see the original master file, not the horribly compressed YT version. So I think if you're aiming for a clean image uploaded to a video sharing website, it's probably best to shoot at a lower ISO. If your aim is to screen your work at film festivals, I think the amount of noise that looked acceptable when viewed on a small monitor or even a laptop, might also become objectionable when seen in a theater. Apparently, noise can also take on many appearances, with some being more or less film-like, others less pleasing to the eye. I'd also be interested in learning why there appears to be a considerable difference in brightness, particularly at lower ISOs, between the GH5s and the GH5. I think it's also worth repeating that Panasonic ISO 6400 is not equivalent to Sony ISO 6400 - Panasonic overstates their ISOs, and there are as many as half a dozen different ways manufacturers come up with these numbers.

I’ve kept an open mind about the a7riii for video, but it looks as though it’s still got a few quirks to work out before I make the switch to Sony.

Did the battery die at 20 seconds?

@Cinegain I just took the lens out of its box. I find that although the focus ring is indeed smooth and shiny, the grip is fine - though that might change if my hands get sweaty. Anyhow, I don't plan on manually focusing with this thing. It's gotta be one of the tiniest lenses in my collection - think a Laowa 7.5mm that's been working out at the gym for 6 months. :=) Crazy to think I'll be able to get a 168mm ff equivalent with ETC! And it's supposed to be razor sharp from center to edge wide open.

Just picked up the Sigma 60mm f/2.8 DN. So excited. Expect to see some footage in a couple weeks.

@IronFilm Did you update your blog to bring up the issue with TC, 'cause I'm not seeing it.

@DaveAltizer Buy it now and sell it when the a7siii comes out. Throughout the entire video, I kept watching your camera perched precariously on the edge of the table on top of that wobbly gorillapod, thinking it was going to fall over any minute! Thanks for answering my question about AF-C and the touch screen thingy. One question - can switching from APS-C to full frame be assigned to a function button?

C’mon, Don, a recorder/monitor on a mirrorless camera is still a pretty compact package. ? The beauty of these cameras is, you can rig them out with a cage, rails, follow focus and matte box when needed, or use them as is. Most filmmakers wouldn’t rely solely on a little 3” LCD for pulling focus on an important project. I do agree with you however, that it’s awesome to be able to record 10-bit in camera.

The video quality is awesome, stabilization’s been improved, overheating’s no longer an issue, battery life is excellent, autofocus is faster and more accurate - the only flaw as I see it is apparently you can’t just touch the LCD to track a subject in AF-C like you can with Canon’s DPAF. Is that so?

what are you smoking? I want some too. ?

New fw and it hasn’t even been released yet? ?