Shirozina

How about doing some proper research and getting your data from several sources - just like a scientist?

Wikipedia is clearly wrong then as anybody with a pair of working eyes can easily prove.

Where and who has measured this because I'm telling you it's just factually wrong. You make some valid points in other areas but your whole argument falls down if you keep on insisting that our eyes are limited to a very narrow DR and therefore any more than this in a capture or display device is not needed.

5-8 stop DR of the human eye is just plain wrong. Everything else therefore doesn't add up.

Just got my V-Log upgrade and did a quick studio test against Cinelike D (contrast -5) to see the DR difference and it's quite significant! Didn't realise the zebras max out at 80% in V-Log. Will have to test in the real world as that's a lot of tonality to expand out again on a highly compressed codec.......

Genius!

If you are happy with only 8 stops of DR then go with it on the 5d3 ML setting I used to shoot slide film back in the day with less than 8 stops of DR - and get paid quite well for it!

Yes in order to get the data rate down this is a necessary compromise. All other cameras inc the 5D3 when generating internal codecs will be using the full bit depth to start with and not truncating it before it goes through the internal image processing pipline where it is tonally compressed into an 8bit space and then data compressed to meet the recording medias write speed limits With the limited bandwidth of the internal codec then obviously this is the case as evidenced by the 4.2.0 codec vs 4.2.2 - how Panasonic can get a 10bit 4.2.2 4k codec to work at a pretty low 150mps is amazing. It's physically impossible to capture more than 8 stops of DR if you only have an 8 bit signal from the A/D - if you are 'hard data guy' then this should be easy to understand

Sony A7xx cameras can get way more DR in video than it's theoretically possible to do if the data is being truncated to 8bit after the A/D stage and before it gets compressed.

Where can you get 8 bit RAW these days? - AFAIK all cameras we are using today capture at 14 bit at the A/D after the sensor.

10 bit won't give you a dynamic range improvement - 8 or 10 bit is the output file bit depth. A camera can have a 14+ stop DR and output this into an 8 bit jpeg image that will look very good - anybody who is working with in stills with RAW capture can tell you this esp if they have a good MF digital back which are even 16 bit capture and you can create absolutely stunning 8bit output files full of subtle graduations in tone and colour that you can only dream of with a DSLR. 8 bit is absolutely fine as an output file .................as long as you nail everything in camera and your cameras internal processing engine isn't compressing the hell out of the image and throwing away image data which unfortunately with internal codecs which are designed for broadcast and not storage it certainly is. Massive lossy data compression is the enemy we are up against - 8 vs 10 bit output is a red herring IMO. The ML RAW hack simply removes this obstacle and the benefits are clear to see.

Wouldn't just switching between 10 and 8 bit on the same camera be a better test - easy to do on the BMPCC at least.

On all cameras ? - Not my experience on the A7s and A7r2 where it's much cleaner than the internal codec with regards to being able to work with Slog-2 and not get banding in blue skies even with quite aggressive contrast and exposure changes.

You get a 0.71x focal reduction with the speedbooster so your 17mm becomes a 12mm = 24mm equivalent. I have only used a speed booster on my Sony A7r2 in APS-C mode and was disappointed by the sudden fall off or field curvature at the frame edges but you could get around this by using the teleconverter setting in the GH5 with some loss of coverage. Maybe the speedbooster for M43 is better than the one for APS-C as well? I'd still say a full frame camera gives you more options as it's easier to get longer focal lengths with M43 than wider ones. I've just bought a GH5 but I don't intend on using it for my architectural work and if I wanted to go into video of architecture I'd use ( and have used) my A7s with an external recorder to get UHD 8bit 4.2.2 files on ProRes for the highest quality - I wouldn't feel comfortable passing on highly compressed 4.2.0 footage to a paying client......

If you are careful you can manually do a vertical or horizontal pan with a shift lens. One thing to avoid with shift lenses and video is moving the camera - panning while having a lots of shift as the aparent movement in the shifted corners can be quite excessive. They are best used for locked off shots. Also If your clients are architects they won't understand a world that is not in 2 point perspective............

Banding is easily seen in 8 bit moving images but not necessarily due to them being 8 bit but because of the high levels of compression on internal codecs. 8bit files recorded via HDMI to an external recorder in a good codec like ProRes can be very smooth and banding free even when pushed around in grading. 10 bit allows even more manipulation and opens up the use of LOG without fear of banding.Some cameras on the other hand can't record a blue sky without showing banding even straight out of the camera in a non log profile. 10 Bit RAW is probably just about OK for a Canon 5D3 which tops out at a theoretical 11ish stops of DR but in practice due to it not being able to ETTR perfectly on every shot means 10 stops or less as a practical limit. From this you can generate good 10 or 8 bit files with the benefit of a RAW conversion done outside the camera where quality rather than speed can be prioritised. We know for instance that the RAW converters in NLE's like Resolve are not as good as those for stills in say Adobe Camera RAW or Capture One due to the CPU overheads required so imagine what a tiny camera CPU does with RAW sensor data in real time in order to spit out an HD 8bit 4.2.0 file at 25mbs........

Apart from the fact that the small sensor makes the OP's existing wide shift lenses near useless.........

What about just call it the 'correct' exposure? On an internal codec the Zebras are linked to the green channel which means you can easily clip the red channel in skintone highlights without being aware of it so knocking the exp down a bit from an ETTR starting point is a good way of avoiding this. Then again ETTR is not my idea of a good way to expose non RAW images anyway - yes you avoid the noise but you also end up placing certain critical tones ( skintones) on different parts of the profile curve depending on your lighting contrast which will make shot matching in post more of a problem.

Exe. Tele Conv setting in the GH5 - corner shading solved?

I have used the 058B and it is indeed very quick and easy to set up but it's very heavy! The flowtech has a lock on each leg so is arguably not as quick or easy. The large tube CF design will now doubt become more popular as it resists twisting with a pan head better than single tubes. I have a Gitzo 5 series Systematic which is not as good as my Vinten 3776-3 which has double tubes in this respect. The Vinten is also better at resisting vibration in a wind with longer lenses. That's 2 reasons why video tripods have twin leg designs and it will be interesting to see if this can be equalled or bettered by large single tubes?

I wouldn't recommend the GH5 for use with shift lenses as the crop factor will severely restrict the usefulness of your shift lenses - your 24mm will become like a 50mm on your 5D2.

If the OP is going to use shift lenses effectively then they are not much use on small sensors as the shift lenses they loose their coverage. Full frame is the ideal solution, APS-C usable (17mm shift gives you 24mm equivalent. FOV) . The A7sII or 5DII/II with ML. A7rII can be used full frame for video but Moire can be a problem which will is an important consideration for architecture so think carefully about that if you go the ML route . They A7r2 gets you very good 4k in APS-C mode and you get a full frame 42mp camera for your stills as to replace your 5D2 - it's the obvious choice to me...........

I use 17,24 and 50 shift lenses on Sony A7r,A7r2,A7s as an architectural photographer without an problems and have shot video with them as well. The latest Metabones adaptors are flocked lined inside so no glare issues. Full time live view makes using these lenses very easy and better than on canon bodies + you get much better DR. It's a 'no - brainer' really! I'd avoid speedboosters though as the edge resolution can fall off quite dramatically which for architectural work is quite an important requirement.

GH5 order placed - the only reasonable response to all this. Thankfully I kept my best M43 glass......

I've had these as well - maybe it has 4 legs......