mercer

The colors look good but the skin is the issue... not the skin color but the texture. Otherwise, it looks great and I suspect some really great work done with the GH5.

Multi million dollar productions don't need Raw because they have so much other budgetary freedoms. It's us indie filmmakers that need every little bit of IQ help we can get. How do you compete against the FS5 and BM Ursa Pro at the same price range when they both shoot Raw? After using Raw in my current short, I don't think I would shoot anything but for a serious project. For smaller 2-3 minute pieces, yeah I would love a good solid space saving codec... probably 4K but that may even be overkill.

I am not here to knock the GH5, as I don't own one and cannot speak first hand about its quality. I may still purchase a GH5 someday. I cannot deny its allure. I have seen some insanely great work from it, yours included. The motorcycle video that Emmanuel posted the other day is also some of the nicest video I've seen from it, but there seemed to be a growing consensus, based on your labor, that the GH5 is better than a 5D3 with ML Raw and I believe they misconstrued the point of your work here. Or maybe I did. Either way, nice job. And food for thought.

The 80D is just about price reference and how Canon gets hit with a double standard more than Panasonic or Sony gets hit for the same tactics. The point of my post is not what is better, it's about what you are getting for your money. And in my opinion $6500 for a cinema camera that doesn't shoot Raw is not that great of a deal. The G85 is also a great camera. But there is a major price gap between the G85 and GH5. It almost seems like Panasonic doesn't know what they're doing. It benefits a lot of people, but these price gaps could also have a negative effect on brand loyalty. Take Canon for example... if you are a Canon shooter and you started with a Rebel series camera, you've bought into their ecosystem with some good primes and zooms but you're ready for an upgrade, you can buy an 80D. When you're ready for another upgrade, you can buy a 7Dmarkwhatever, then a 5D? Or a C100mk? Or a 1DX, etc... With Panasonic you can start with a GX85, then go to a G85, then you have to take a big jump to the GH5. At this point most buyers have accrued some native lenses and maybe they're ready for another jump... but the next logical jump is this cine camera that is $4500 more than your current camera and it doesn't use your lens collection... UMM?!?! So, JVC here you go...

Copy and paste the link, but wait a few seconds for the video to embed before you hit enter or save.

Am loving what you're getting from the LS300. I really think I'd rather have it than a GH5. Btw, your XT20 suggestion is interesting. I saw some nice videos online.

Haha, okay. I guess if your biggest take away from my post is my mention of the 80D, then enough said. But I guess I'll play, I never said Raw is mandatory but when your biggest competitor in that price range offers it at a cheaper price, then... But you're right, without Raw, I wouldn't spend an extra $2500 for Panny when I can get class leading AF, C-Log, Canon color in a small bitrate for $2500 less with the C100ii. But that's just me.

Again not trying to be contrary, but I'm not so sure about that either. The 5D3 is a professional stills camera and more than enough, even with its factory firmware, for wedding videos. The Canon badge also still pulls a lot of weight in the industry, I assume. But before I say any more and get castrated here, the GH5 is the best camera ever invented and the only option for any level of filmmaker and all other camera companies should stop making cameras...? Anyway, my original point is this... the author disliking Panasonic color and having to create a workaround to make it look like Canon color is more a testament to his abilities than it is a plus for the GH5.

But is that a testament to the GH5 or a deficit of the Ursa... JK. I really have to test these MLVFS I've been hearing so much about... if only someone on this site advocated more for them...

Good point, but I wouldn't use a GH5 under those circumstances either.

That's true and maybe I just feel like being a contrarian today, but Canon and Nikon repeatedly get slammed on this site for protecting product lines, when Panasonic does the same exact thing. The price and feature gap between the G85 and GH5 is huge, especially if you are an HD shooter. To have to pay $2000 to get the high bitrate, all-i 1080p is kind of ridiculous. Sure you are getting a bunch more features with the GH5, but for half the money you can get an 80D with fairly high bitrate all-i 1080p, with DPAF, with a S35mm aesthetic, with better native lens options. Unfortunately, as of now, it seems Panny's cineX camera will be the same. Without exporting Raw, I don't see the point in paying $6500 for the cineX camera. But admittedly this is all conjecture at this time.

Oh yeah, I am not disagreeing with you, the GH5 is an amazing camera with a lot of features. More camera than probably 50% of the readers' needs and GH5 owner's needs on this site. But I believe the premise of Hyalinejim's efforts is to get Canon-like color out of the GH5, because he wasn't fond of the color coming out of the GH5... so it's a dubious plus for the GH5... and I am really referring to the new GH5 fan boys that are floating around the site.

The problem is, not to burst GH5 owners' bubbles, or take anything away from @hyalinejim 's work here, is that it takes about 35 seconds to a minute to get the color out of 5D3 Raw. And if you're not getting the same latitude as Raw, as @squig reported, then you may as well save the $500 and get a 5D3.

I get that everybody is stoked about this camera but once again, Panasonic has a huge gap in their camera pricing. There's already a gap between the G85 and GH5 and at $6500, there's a huge gap between the GH5 and this new camera. I know the GH5 is in a different category than the new camera, but with the hybrid nature of the GH5... So, if the pricing is correct, how does Panasonic fill the gap between the GH5 and this new camera to lure GH5 users who are ready to upgrade to move to this new camera instead of going to a Sony A7Siii and then the cheaper FS5?

I can barely make 5D3 look good let alone trying to match GH5... I wish I was a good enough colorist for that. It is cool it can be done, though.

I think one of the biggest misconceptions about 5D3 ML Raw is that it is difficult to shoot with, but in reality, once everything is set up, it is the simplest camera to operate. And even though there are a few extra post steps, color work is pretty simple and straightforward as well.

E stabilization will make it look more stable, it will also crop in a little, which is helpful when you are using some wide c mount lenses, but since it is software based, it could induce some artifacts.

Actually I think the LS300 may have the nicest 4K image under $3000. And some of the coolest features, but I shoot almost entirely guerilla style and I would be afraid the form factor may draw too much attention. But the idea of different sensor sizes sounds so cool. My c-mounts would love it and then to be able to use a Kern prime as a zoom... too effing cool. I have tested so many cameras over the past year and the images I come back to and really like are from 5D3 ML Raw, the D5500 and the CineLikeD with the FZ2500. So I should probably just stick to those. Although I did go through a Fuji phase and the color OOC really is spectacular.

Now you're talking. But seriously, it's funny how quickly I can go from hot to cold on equipment. In reality, I am really completely happy with the 5D3, but am looking for something I can get slow motion with a quicker post workflow and cheaper cards. The siren call of 10 bit 4K, 4K 60p, and IBIS had me there for a minute or two. Still a cool camera, but I definitely have to weigh my options a little more now. The 60p from my D5500 looks great to me, so without the in camera normal to slow motion function, then... ehh... I may as well just get an FZ2500.

Thank you for double checking for me. Yeah the FZ2500 is awesome and to be honest with you, without the slow and quick function, the GH5 seems a little less intriguing to me... as silly as I'm sure that sounds. I think I will definitely wait to see how the summer firmware is before I buy one. D7500 here I come... and maybe another FZ2500... or maybe I should follow your lead and go with the LS300... I never used the dolly zoom, but I figured it was entirely some kind of digital scaling... or some shit... oh well that's easy enough to do with my slider.

I think that was a great point. I always downsample 4K footage to 1080p for editing and delivery with EditReady. The fact that the C100 does it in camera with such a small bitrate, with such IQ success, is definitely a pro of that camera.

Honestly if I was only concerned with IQ, the 5D3 would be enough, but the post workflow is a little long and it lacks some of the simple, or should I say, easy features of the GH5... mostly 60p in 4K and the variable frame rates conformed in camera. So for me, the 5D3 would be the camera I'd use for my more thoughtful shorts and the GH5 would be for my Micro shorts. Sorry for some reason I cannot get rid of this post. So, earlier in this post I mentioned some features in the FZ2500 that I really enjoyed and looked forward to possibly using with the GH5 but now after looking for them in the manual, I cannot find them. So can someone please confirm if the GH5 has Slow and Quick like the FZ2500 has? Basically you push a button and the video will go from normal motion into slow motion for as long as you hold the button? Please tell me the GH5 has this and please tell me it works in 4K 60p? There was also a Dolly Zoom function. Also can someone please confirm if you can shoot 4K up to 60p in variable frame rate mode so the camera conforms it to 24p? Thanks!!!

I do the same thing, but I am fighting the desire to hit Buy it Now. I have almost bought a GH5 3 times this week. Let us know your preliminary thoughts.

I've probably gotten more skilled in the last two months than I have in the last two years, so I know how it feels to use a camera and compare it to other operator's videos and question what I was doing wrong. Luckily I am too thick headed to quit, but for some beginners they may become overwhelmed and give up... which kinda sucks too. If a person who had $2000 to spend on a camera came up to me and asked me to recommend a good beginners camera to them, I don't think I would necessarily recommend the GH5, hell I'd probably recommend an 80D or a D5500 or a G85 if they like that Panasonic look.

And to add, I understand that one may get really excited about the GH5 and all its promise, but we also shouldn't ignore its limitations either. I see no reason why we shouldn't acknowledge that the AF isn't the best available on the market. Even if you find it acceptable, there are way better options out there if AF is a major concern. We also should acknowledge that there is some extra noise reduction going on that may lead to some plastic results. Just because a camera has a lot going for it, doesn't mean we shouldn't be honest about its shortcomings.