jonpais

This is precisely the answer I was looking for last night, which asked if, based solely on the preproduction work we've seen so far, and disregarding the wealth of enhancements, would forum members upgrade to the GH5. My own answer would be that I will be getting the GH5, not for any improvement in image quality, but simply for things like the improved EVF and touch screen.

@Neumann Films So these videos aren't from your studio? Sorry, but I guess I'm confused. However that may be, I was referring to the colors in the first video here.

I'm not by any means criticizing the filmmaking here, which is of a high calibre, but the the color of the original graded footage is lusterless, the skin tones flat and washed out.

of course! ha

off-topic I know, but I'd like to get a lav mic. any suggestions?

If only the GH5 could levitate...

The number of upgrades from the GH4 is simply astounding. Like I said before, no need to compare to Sony, Canon, Fuji, Olympus. I know I will be getting mine as soon as it is available.

But how many here purchase a micro four thirds camera for crazy low light performance and silly dynamic range? Those are the province of APS-C and full frame...

Fair enough.

Liork, I'm not rushing into anything. I'm not passing judgement on anything.

The newer, larger EVF with double the resolution is amazing; the larger rear LCD with greater resolution is also incredible; a vector scope, waveform monitor, H265, high frame rates, 4K 60p - they've really outdone themselves; not to mention the two dozen other features Panasonic saw fit to put into this camera; perhaps more than we even deserve; but is there anyone here, who has seen the little footage already available from the GH5, or who has shot with the GH4, that thinks the GH5 image quality absolutely blows away Panasonic's former flagship model? In other words, if it didn't have all the razzle-dazzle features, who here would be upgrading based on image quality alone? Sorry if it will anger some individuals, but I think it's a valid question.

With Panasonic cameras, you can turn NR down quite a bit in the menu if you like. If you watch Fredrik Lyhne's excellent high ISO test of the GX80/85, you'll see that the camera performs very well at higher ISOs (I thought it did well up to ISO 3200). And I did another test this morning and found that the G85 performs admirably at ISO 1600, and even 6400 is acceptable according to some users here. Dialing down NR to -5 increased detail a bit at higher ISOs. There is no reason not to expect the GH5 to do as well, or even outperform those cameras. But the NX1 is an APS-C sensor, so it is not even fair to compare to the smaller u43 sensor. Those wanting super duper low light performance or crazy dynamic range should consider moving up to an APS-C sensor camera. And as most here already know, don't take Cinema5D as gospel. Actually, I find Beritar's post kind of surprising, since I've seldom read anything negative about the NX1. If it was available here in Vietnam, I'd already have purchased one.

It's not for nothing that by April, I'll have already purchased something like six Panasonic cameras. And just months after writing in my personal blog about how Panasonic dropped the GM line, they go ahead and release the GX800 or GF9 or whatever - a camera the size of the GM1, but with a flippy screen and 4k, which I would also consider getting.

The other day, I posted about having reasonable expectations (to the effect that we shouldn't expect more than 12 stops dynamic range, not to expect AFC to rival that of Canon, that Panasonic's color science would not change significantly...), which upset a few forum members; then, I watch the truly excellent digidirect presentation and am completely blown away, not only the features, but by the truly good sample videos (slo mo, rack focusing, etc.); then, nothing but bitching and moaning from everyone about jello, waiting for future firmware updates and so on; I just don't get it. This is quite simply the most complete package, with the greatest number of upgrades I've ever seen to an already good system - yet even now, some say they are going to wait for Sony to deliver the holy grail? Am I missing something here? The GH5 is the cat's meow!

I tried again this morning, this time at ISO 1600, Standard, Sharpening -5, NR -5 and contrast at 0. I made sure the subject was in focus this time. ISO 1600 is perfectly fine. So I am a happy camper. Not sure if I'm going to stick with contrast at 0 though, because I think in contrasty lighting, I can save some of the shadows a bit by turning contrast down just a touch. More tests tomorrow morning to confirm. If some here think determining which settings are best for you with the GX80/85 or G80/85 is confusing, wait till we're confronted with the gazillion options in the GH5. Just looking at the spec sheet this afternoon was starting to make my head spin!

The GH3 didn't have it, but both my GH4 and G85 have Monochrome live view. I often used it along with peaking, I've found it very useful. The EVF and LCD on the GH5 sound like they'll be good enough to get focus with focus assist alone. Since the G85 has Monochrome view, I would be very surprised if the GH5 didn't as well.

Has anyone tested for overheating? ??? just kidding!

my thoughts exactly.

Hi LAfilm Are you referring to Monochrome Live View?

Great to hear, especially as mine should be arriving any day now. So worried from all the videos on YouTube showing screens going nuts, etc. Never in my life until now have I ordered electronics worrying that a new product will malfunction. Anyhow, I'm purchasing Apple Care, to be sure.

Right, once you begin recording, focus assist isn't available.

I agree, the skin tone looks better in 2, I was just looking at the contrast

@Fredrik Lyhne I think the third picture is the most pleasing, it has the softest contrast, the most flattering for the man's face. Or maybe #1!

Do you raise shadows at all?

Do you think it makes sense to turn NR all the way down to -5? In my shots, it seems to increase detail a touch, and I didn't see a huge increase in noise.