DBounce

I did know about the HD output in 10 bit... but why no 12 -bit output in 4K? Or 10 bit output in 4K? We both know it could do this.. if not for Canon deliberately preventing this. I’m not going to complain. It’s still a great camera... it’s just not one I’m clamoring to own. I need a better reason. Something that would make me want to put up with the added workflow. Honestly, the first camera that can do a clean ISO 6400 with an upper limit of 12800, that has on-chip HDR is going to be a must have. I think at that point even the diehards will be jumping ship to whatever that is. My guess is it will come from Panasonic or Sony.

Correct, DOF stays the same... and honestly that is a lucky coincidence, since AF is unusable on the GH5 for the most part. I would say in a cinema camera too much DOF can work against you. Heck I dial it down frequently in stills because you cannot get a sense of where the image was taken, and oftentimes when telling a story (weather in stills or motion) you want the viewer to understand context. Interested, I’ll throw something together and chuck it up on YouTube. As I sit here waiting for the GH5S I have high hopes for this camera. So far I like what I see. Though @Neumann Films video seems to be a bit off in the motion cadence department... clean imagery, but the cadence feels like 30p not 24p. We will know soon enough what Panasonic has given us.

I have to disagree. 1. There would be a shiny new Canon C200 sitting on my shelf... right now, if not for the absence of a middle codec. It’s the added workflow that I don’t dig. I like a fast turn around time. You just don’t get that when you have to sit around transcoding. 2. I can push my 10 bit footage considerably further in post than I can my 8 bit footage. I think Raw 12 bit is great. Lovely to have it. But for most here the 12 bit would be for special situations, whereas the 10 bit would be for general use. I would have preferred they left out 8 bit, as with the move to HDR, it seems it’s usefulness is in sight. Now I know some of you will banter on about how, “ only .00001% of the population has 4K HDR TVs”... well that’s all fine and dandy, but I have four of them, and I’m not even counting my numerous smartphone that all support HDR content. So for me, it’s important. I don’t even have a problem with the crazy expensive media. I have many of these 256GB, $700 a pop CFast cards laying around that I use in the 1DXMk2. But it would have been great to have a clean 12 bit raw output that I could send to an external recorder. That would have silenced many of the naysayers. We are not annoyed because we hate Canon. I would bet that most of those who are bothered by the implementation of the C200 are that way because they had planned on buying one... at least that’s how I feel. If any of you have a C200 and 1DXMk2 I would love to see a shootout comparing overal image quality. I see nothing like this online. The two cameras a priced close enough so that many might consider one vs the other. Granted they have different focuses... but still...

The light is the same, but the intensity (concentration) is different. You do not see any difference in DOF. Think of it this way, normal sunlight will not catch a newspaper on fire, but concentrate it with a magnifying glass and that same normal sunlight will cause the paper to burn. For the camera sensor it is getting more light than it normally would, because the concentration is higher. End result is you can work at lower ISOs, but you gain no DOF advantage. This is not theory... I see this whenever I use my SpeedBoosters.

Do you suppose there is a reason Metabones calls it a “SpeedBooster”?

When you attach a full frame lens via SB the camera automatically increases the available f-stop range. You gain an additional stop of light with the MBSB. There are tons of articles about this. Here is one newsshooter. Yes, forgot that about prolost settings... there are so many pseudo logs out there.

So this video represent an exploration into these cameras. I have never really taken the time to do a real side by side, other than when I first got the GH5 and wanted to see the FOV difference compared to the Canon. I have to say, on a 4K monitor, I can clearly see noise at all ISO on both cameras. The GH5 was color graded as it was shot using V-Log. Whilst I choose (as I almost always do) to use a baked-in color profile with the Canon. I had to work prettty hard to get the GH5’s colors close to the Canon... and even then, I can tell you I was not 100% happy. But that said, in the first few shots from the GH5, the color grade is truer to what my eyes could see in that room vs what the 1DXMk2 reproduced. About that room: This was not a low-light test... It was really more of a “I’m in a normal room, with a bunch of people, and I want to try to get some footage without anything but practical lighting... because I did not bring a lighting kit to lunch”. Why? Because often times I take my camera along when we go out. So capturing footage inpromptu is a frequent situation that I find myself in. Realization: I always thought the GH5 was clean at < ISO 1600, but after watching this video on a 4K monitor, in my office, I can tell you that is simply not the case. Under these “normal” lighting condition both cameras showed shadow noise at even ISO 500. I don’t know why I have never noticed this before, but I think that the better TVs and monitors become, the more apparent the shortcomings of our cameras will be. Where am I now? The noise from the Canon and the GH5 was comparable at similar ISOs with the MBSB attached. Granted, the GH5 could gather a lot more light than the Canon with the focal reducer. But if set to similar ISOs the noise was close enough as made no difference. So what does this mean for the GH5S? Looking at these noise levels I am surprised that I somehow missed it prior to this. Perhaps it’s because I was only critical of my images when they were planned and lighted scenes? The room was not really that dark. The shots in the video are pretty representative of what my eyeballs could see. I’m a bit surprised that I could not get perfectly clean footage under fairly normal conditions. Did I do anything other than CG? Well, I should point out that the second to last scene (2.26) was using a film look, but honestly the noise is exactly the same. It looked bad, so I took it into Magic Bullet and threw a look on it. It was shot at ISO 2500 on the GH5 using a native Panasonic 12-35mm f2.8 version 2 lens @12mm. Another shot at (1.55) was more about delving into what a I could do creatively with it. That’s the scene shot at 70mm, where Hildy (the Doogans) looks at the camera. I add a film stock and denoiser at 15%. The rest of the footage is untouched, other than basic CG to match the 1DXMk2. I think that native glass... unlite is not a great idea. And most of the “fast” glass with a few exceptions does not stay sharp unless stopped down a bit. Anything to add? I’ll check if I still have prolost on the camera. But I can tell you, I have tried more flat profile on the Canon than you can shake a stick at. The best they get you is a fairly light grade. If you want to bend and twist your footage, you need at least 10 bit. It is much much more robust. But for ultimate flexibility you need 12 bit raw. From my experience with 8 bit from Canon and Sony, they are more fragile when grading.

I’ve kinda lost my faith in pseudo log profiles. Real logs are not merely color profiles. There are no real log profiles for the 1DXMK2. And I can tell you from my previous experience and grading 1DXMK2 footage vs 10bit VLog that the Canon footage breaks much sooner than VLog. For that reason I tend to pick a color profile and bake it in on the Canon. But IQ is a closer call between these two. It’s been awhile since I shot video with the Canon, so I’m also focusing on the shooting experience between the two after owning both for some time. The stills performance of the 1DXMK2 is so good it make even the ham-fisted look like a pro. The GH5 makes you work harder to get magic. I’m pulling out the tripod

I’m sort of kicking around the idea of doing a shoutout between the 1DXMK2 and the Panasonic LUMIX GH5. It’s been a while since I’ve used the Canon for video... mostly the GH5 has been my weapon of choice. But I was never disappointed with the video from the Canon. However, for grading the 10bit footage of the GH5 seems to be more flexible. What got me started on the shootout idea was a YouTuber who said he’s returning the Canon and keeping his 5DMk4. One of the reasons he states is ISO performance... something I have never had issue with on the 1DXMK2. I’ve managed with the limited ISO of the GH5, which The 1DXMk2 handily outperforms. So here’s the question... do the shootout now, or wait till I get me hot little paws on the GH5S? I’ll be using a MB SB to keep things even. What do you think. Or is this one already put to bed? And I’m not just speaking about low light. Oh, also... if any of you have a C200 and one of these two... or both... I would love to see how they all compare

I agree... can’t see myself forgoing Canon for this. But at the same time Canon really messed up by not including a middle codec on the C200. If not for that omission I would have purchased it. An I know I’m not alone in that sentiment.

We can dream.

It kind of sucks that good AF and HDR was not included in the GH5S. The chip was designed to do this, but was disabled by Panasonic. Also the need for usable AF was clearly known. So...

I know it’s early, but since Panasonic is apparently filing patents for sensors with HDR and DPAF it makes sense to speculate that these feature might make their way to the upcoming GH6. Of course there are no guarantees of this. But interesting nonetheless.

In stock now at CVP:

I just don’t get it... I have the GH5 and I was happy to learn about the GH5S. Pre-ordered immediately. Who doesn’t like options. No one is forced to buy this camera. Honesty won’t miss IBIS. A gimbal is a better solution.

They are long overdue for a new pocket cam.

Here is the big difference between the sensors... if the GH5S is using the Starvis IMX294, then this sensor can capture high and low ISOs simultaneously. This is how it was designed by Sony. The way Panasonic has implemented it splits this function into two discrete events. Personally I would love to have a real HDR mode that does what the sensor was originally designed to do. And I believe that would not be hard to do. Even if it sucks more power, they could make it only function when connected to the battery grip or AC power. The option would be welcomed.

Looks like Kinefinity might have killed the Terra 5k. All references to it are removed from their website.

Sounds great, but no footage.

I would love to see Panasonics new sensor make it’s way into the GH6... that would be ground breaking. I think the way the GH5S implements the Starvis IMX294 is not ideal. This dual ISO business clearly has merits, but the idea of capturing both high and low ISO at once and combining them in real time to create a HDR video is more appealing to me. I wonder if this could be enabled in firmware? After all, this is what the sensor was originally designed to do. Instead Panasonic chose to disable this dual capture mode and use them independently... which while somewhat useful, is actually bastardizing the sensor.

Not under 12800... highest ISO was 12800, as per the posters comments.

I think a better solution would be a lockable sensor. But no one has that... yet. In any case I am glad the GH5S exists as an option.

Well since the GH5 is discontinued I guess you will have to hang up your camera bag Oh wait, its not discontinued... All is good in the world again... just keep the GH5 and add the lowlight camera of your choice. Why is everyone hating on the GH5S? Would you be happier if all we had was the GH5? Do you have a GH5? Honestly, while 3200 can be used if you have no choice, it really is not a great option in my experience. I have my GH5 locked to max 1600 ISO.

Regardless of specs and on paper numbers, it looks like a big improvement to me. 12800 ISO on the GH5S looks close to 1600 on the GH5. Yes it loses IBIS, so? There are clearly technical reasons for doing away with it. No IBIS I can deal with... poor low light performance is harder to deal with when you cannot control the lighting.

The AJA Cion is larger than say Sony FS7 etc... It’s a large and professional format of camera. It would be at home on set. But this is not the sort of thing that you will ever take along on a whim. It’s a permit camera. It is not larger than the URSA, but larger than the mini. For what it does, imo there are better options. Clearly the market agrees, as sale have been dismal.