John Matthews

Is the Ninja V compatible with 5.8K ProRes RAW? I thought you needed the V+ for that.

I have 2 GH2s. I usually only use them for live streaming, but the other day, I decided to swap it out with the GH6. I "only" do 1080p streaming and the image was about 10% more detailed than the GH2, but by the time it actually reaches the other person, I doubt anyone would notice. I also love the ergos on the GH2. I've come accustomed to operating it backwards. I will say it does weird things when you hit the display button in the HDMI. The internal mics are decent, but I think it's mainly because of no IBIS. The GX85, by comparison, is unusable. This is actually why I use the G100 for a lot of stuff because there isn't any weirdness in the audio. This cannot be entirely the case though. My GX850 has some of the worst audio I've ever heard, even with C-AF off. Manufacturers fine-tune their mics to NOT pick up some sounds (IBIS, AF motors, etc.). My feeling is that the GX85 and GX850 didn't have the R&D budget for that.

Good to hear that there are still people willing to go very in-depth in such nerdy topics. Yesterday, I tried asking ChatGPT about the notion of equivalencies, a hot topic on forums. It failed miserably. I asked for a MFT equivalent of shooting my grandmother's 1936 Rolliecord. I know the "rough" answer, but ChatGPT kept making mathematical mistakes. I have to say I'm super impressed with it though. As an English teacher, it's a tremendous tool. For filmmakers, it's great too. My point with my post was to say that Forums could get eaten up by such services if the forum is mainly used for "help in learning". AI seems to be better, faster, and have fewer barriers to getting decent responses. Also, I've only been using the free version. The paid version is better, I'm sure.

Something that I've noticed is that Chat GPT seems to give efficient and relevant answers to almost any subject, including cameras. It's straight to the point, no BS, no political stuff, no opinions, etc. Only, sometimes, it's flat-out wrong. Here are some of my questions that I've asked, only because I was curious: Does 4k 8 bit have more or less information as 1080p 10 bit? What about 4k 4:2:0 vs 2k 4:2:0 10 bit? What about 4k 4:2:2 8 bit vs 2k 4:2:0 10 bit? How about 2k 4:2:2 vs 2k 4:2:0 10 bit? Does 2k 4:2:2 8 bit have more information than 4k 4:2:0 8 bit? Is 4k or 4k downresed to 2k better for avoiding moiré patterns? What post-processing techniques specifically designed to address moiré are there? Can you explain clone stamping techniques and can you do it with a basic video editor? Will shooting in v-log help with moiré? Can shooting at higher frame rates help with moiré? In terms of detail, can humans see the difference between 2k and 4k at normal viewing distances? In terms of percentage of resolution increase, what's the difference between 2k and SD? Is there the same perceptible clarity between 2k and 4k? What are the benefits of recording in 24fps rather than 23.978fps? How are digital cinema files prepared (file format, bit-rate, frame rates) for cinema theaters? I feel a little "embarrassed" to ask some of these questions simply because I don't want to have others take time to answer them. Also, AI just gives me what I want, nothing more. No need for sifting through info or moderation. Forums used to be a place for some of these questions, now ChatGPT does the job.

I actually prefer the predictable look of just leaving it at one temperature. Maybe it's old-school, but AWB makes me grade differently for each shot whereas setting the kelvin, as long as it isn't that extreme, helps with the overall feel. Shoot a night shot inside and we can tell it's night because of the yellow lighting, morning and evening outside are blue; it just makes sense. Do this AWB and you have to make things feel blue, yellow, etc. in post. I've done tests regarding contrast settings in particular. My findings were clear: Panasonic cameras DON'T have more latitude or any benefit from reducing contrast from the default; if anything, it just might screw up. It would seem that so many have said this (including myself, probably), but when looking at the results, this "wisdom" doesn't hold up from what I see. I've heard people say "the compression doesn't have to work as hard", but I haven't seen anything that obvious to come to the conclusion of -5 contrast and saturation. That was a very interesting test and it probably confirms what I said above as the ones where the contrast and saturation was low. I'm almost willing to throw up my arms and say: "the Panasonic engineers probably know better than me"- just leave contrast and saturation at its default if you like the way it looks. Sometimes, we just overthink it.

Recently, I've rediscovered Cine V and dialing my WB to 5000K. I've been just leaving it there and, to my eye, my footage has been looking much better. I have to wonder if "-5,-5,-5,-5" was just terrible advice that some have given over the years. To me, dialing things back in post makes more sense than making "test chart" dynamic range and pushing everything up in post, only to produce an image that still looks likes it was pushed in post. I think there might be something to having the lion's share of the image pipeline be figured out before post. Maybe it's just me. I need to do more tests. I know that for my GH2, as old as it is, the Vivid profile was doing much better for me than any other profile for my live streaming English classes. Most of the other profiles were washed-out and I looked unhealthy or just "blah".

That makes a lot of sense to stick with a GH5s. Hopefully, the S5ii's AF will get into the M43 cameras. I think it will. It basically is with Olympus cameras. Actually, have you tried the OM-1? I know a lot of pros use Olympus cameras underwater.

Those will just be firmware updates of the A6700 and FX30 with a couple of features removed and rebranded as "new". Isn't that how Sony rolls? Mark my words: "the A7S3 will NEVER get animal detect".

Is this what you do? That sounds like a winner.

They said in the live stream that they were considering ProRes Proxy, but they need to have enough people who want it (go to the comments section of the youTube video). I'm not really sure they'd do it though. Thanks for the link. It's quite comprehensive. Personally, I don't need ProRes. I'd rather bake in my noise reduction rather than increase render times.

I'm not sure this was covered, but I have seen some people ask if the GH6 will receive ProRes LT. It probably won't. Lumix USA covered it in this week's stream. Basically, they say their 400Mbps, 600Mbps, 800Mbps ALL-I codecs are equivalent to ProRes LT, ProRes, and ProRes HQ in terms of quality and edit-ability. Not sure how accurate that actually is.

It's WAY more than what I need! I would have probably purchased a G9 hadn't it been for the ridiculously low price, new, with 3 year warranty for a flagship product. I have absolutely no need for it other than creativity. I'm going to watch the Lumix live stream tomorrow as I think they'll say something. Still, the bigger feature for me is the high frame rates on an external SSD.

I feel like there's a little less delay when making short sequential clips. There's a little more delay on the first clip, but it seems to start and stop a little better. Does anyone else have that impression?

Panasonic just released firmware 2.3. In it, there are various things. I'd be interested in knowing some thoughts of users. I feel like it's a bigger update than they previously said.

IMO, the biggest difference between the GH6 and other Lumix cameras is the colors, almost from any profile. Record a human in a scene and the difference is genuinely eye-popping. I've also seen side-by-sides of other FF Lumix cameras and I still prefer the GH6 colors. Maybe it's because of the bit-depth or processing, but it's definitely there. Granted, you can probably match them.

I looked on their site review of the GH6, but I couldn't find any info regarding the GH5 (original) and noise tests in 1080p. I've looked at online versions of 1080p of the GH5 and it looks great too. Still, I don't think it has the same codec options and frame rates.

Thanks for that. I can't tell any difference in those two frames in terms of detail. I know the GH6 has many more codec options and frame rates available over the GH5, but when it comes to pure image quality of 1080p 10bit at 24, 25,30, 50, and 60, I just wasn't sure. I've also heard the GH5s and G9 are exceptional (not sure for their 1080p). I was thinking about it earlier and I have to wonder if the GH6 has better noise performance in 1080p, due to the different sensor and processor. There must be some there. I know my GH2 shoots WAY wider than most other M43 cameras, but I wasn't aware of any difference between the GH6 and other M43 cameras. Could this be due to a different tripod plate? The difference is so minor.

No. I never had the GH5. I've used the GH2, GX80, G100, and GH6. I'd rank them like this: GH6- 10 bit all the way up to 300fps! Over-sampled all the way up to 120fps. Prores, IBIS, 4:2:2, codecs, and then some! GH2- 8 bit at high bit rates when hacked. Has an anti-aliasing filter for less moiré. The major flaw was a noisy blue channel and only really good 24fps. I shoot at 25fps. Use it very often in my live streaming atem mini setup. Super reliable. G100- 8 bit, but frame rates up to 120fps. Fun camera to use. GX80- 8 bit, but I was never really a fan of the 1080p on this camera. However, I should say that I never really tried it that much as the 4k was so much better, at least in my head at the time. It has unworldly IBIS for its size and 2016.

I still can't get over exactly how good the 1080p 4:2:2 10 bit h.264 is on the GH6. The amount of detail and information in that file is simply astounding. I know others are enamored with the 5.8K open gate v-log, but I'm enjoying the 1080p as it blows away any other Panasonic I've had before at that resolution. I imagine the Prores 422 is even better.

I agree with this assessment. In terms of video, it's important to remember that they don't have a cinema line to protect like other brand have. Let's remember almost everyone was following the "Olympus has fallen" mantra when the news had broken Olympus was selling their imaging business- most people were not expecting an E-P7, OM-1, OM-5, 20mm, 40-150 f4, and LS-P4 ii. I'm fairly certain the OM-1 and restructuring brought in some cash to fund some R&D for another camera. If not, that's just capitalism someone made some cash. The OM-1 will be every bit as good as when it came out- cameras are just tools and tools never get worse with time- users get better at using them though. Yes. Small is great! Even though the GH6 is "big", the lenses are not. Nowadays, we can also leave the tripod at home and for those of us with a sketchy back, it's much appreciated.

I was in Point and Shoots, Four Thirds, Pentax, M43, Sony E-mount (FF), then back to M43. For the most part, Sony E-mount cost me the most and was the most limiting (but that was before it became popular). When I moved back to M43, I could afford lenses again and experiment. As long as M43 is around and the gap doesn't become too large with FF (can't really imagine what that means, but if it's DOF and lowlight, it's not enough), I sticking with M43. If I were a pro, I'd own a GH6 and one or 2 S5 iix as it would make sense. The GH6 would give a something to walk around with and give excellent slow-mo capabilities. The S5 iix's at 6k and decent AF could be locked down. I think it would give some sweet results, albeit way overkill for the 99.9% of the views on social media. Je suis exactement dans la même situation !

Yes. I can understand that point of view. I don't have a business or ever expect I'll get paid for anything in photography of video. Concerning companies, Panasonic could also pull the plug on all their camera business, M43 or FF. I doubt their market share is much great than OMDS. So could Sony, Canon, Nikon, Fuji or anyone else. The only company that is family owned is Sigma. That's just business. Massively successful cameras might be a thing of the past; in which case, the cameras that are great now will most likely be great in the future too. l'm still quite happy with results from a GH2, results that will never diminish unless it breaks; in which case, I have a second one too. 🙂 My GH2 saw hundreds of hours of recording video over the past year- it just won't die!

I've been told that about the mark iii and the E-M1x, both are very nice. I love Olympus Pro lenses. When they came out, I really thought it was the wrong direction for M43, but now I own many (12-40, 40-150, and 17mm f/1.2) and I find them so premium in every way. I'd also really like a 12-100, but just can't justify it as I've already have so many M43 lenses. I'd like to see OMDS give us a few more tools and better slow motion. If they ever find a way to have internal NDs, it would be near perfect for me. For now, I've keep with the GH6.

For fun, I've been comparing the E-M1 ii to the GH6. Almost everything is better on the GH6, but the E-M1 ii has the edge in AF and maybe color in some instances. The DR on the GH6 in v-Log is insane though, albeit noisier than the E-M1 ii at base ISO (GH6 is at ISO 2000 with DR boost on). I'd also give IBIS a win for the GH6. I prefer the weight of the Olympus and it feels better with long lenses. If you're on a tight budget and want decent face detection PDAF with very decent IBIS, the Olympus is the way to go. I hear people talk about the variable bitrate on the Olympus as unacceptable, but I'd just say it's super efficient (for the image you get); so, you're going to save tons on media too. When shooting the GH6 at its highest settings (1900mbps), it becomes an absolute pig, hogging up every last bit of space you thought you had within days, not even months. The GH6, of course, roasts almost everything for slow motion at its price point; so there's that too. The Olympus is a detailed, nice color, stable, good AF, C4K, 24fps, one-trick pony.

Interesting. Neither my G100 nor my GH6 have "object prediction" as part of their settings. I'm also a "keep the subject in the center" type; so, I understand where you're coming from. I also have the 12-32 and it's been a regularly used lens. I've even been able to add the Panasonic wide-angle teleconverter on it and it works very well for video as long as you shoot in 4k, making it about a 24mm angle of view with IS (with my G100). The lens is also super sharp. The only bugaboo with the lens is the lack of a manual focus ring, but this isn't that big of a deal.