John Matthews

Me too. I have a bunch of family footage. It doesn't look too bad just on my iMac M1, but upon de-interlacing, it really came to life and it looked like how I remember it. I'd also agree by saying it look close to consumer-grade 1080p.

It won't do anything for dynamic range or color as far as I know. It does a good job detail, noise, de-aliasing, de-interlacing, and re-timing. Not sure for log.

No footage to share, but I hope that the community is checking this out. I was already super impressed with the previous version in that it made all of my interlaced footage look like how I remember it being at the time. With this update (still early times) I noticed you can basically throw many new (but old) formats at it. I took some .MTS (hacked GH2) files and tried them. I upresed them to 4k, reduced the noise a little, added in minimal detail and sharpness and output them as h.265 4k 8bit files at 28Mbit/s. The results looked so good. I found the blue channel to be nicely detailed and virtually noise free (which was a minor problem before). Yes, it takes quite a bit of computing power (1 minute of footage = 20 minutes render), but still... Maybe others have some thoughts?

It does something weird when skimming through a clip (strange macro-blocking)... not sure why that is. On Prores footage, which is roughly the same size doesn't do that. My impression is that the prores footage is better. Am I wrong?

I shot my niece's wedding... it took me forever to edit (made a long version and a short version), but I learned a lot. Anyway, she doesn't want to even look at it for approval because her grandfather who passed away is in it. It's been collecting digital dust for about 3 years. Oh well...

I was hoping to squeak that last little big out of some AVCHD footage (and then delete it)... also, I prefer prores to avchd. I don't use proxies anymore as my M1 iMac seemingly edits EVERYTHING I can throw at it, especially 1080p content.

Sure, but the lion share is tied to cameras, unlike Panasonic, Sony, Ricoh and Fuji who probably wouldn't even sneeze if they stopped their camera business altogether- that was my point. In capitalism if you're not at least 8% above inflation, you're losing money because you could invest it elsewhere and make more. I think they're all waiting for the other one to jump out first, hoping to save their business in the short-term.

I agree that the old stuff is just fine. Part of using old stuff for me is to use AI upscaling after the edit is done(again, not a pro and never get paid for this)... it can be a legitimate workflow, but the added step can be time-consuming. However, rendering an edited 1080p timeline goes relatively fast; so, you might save there too. One can also save about 4x on storage too. Given most people can't see the difference, why not? It's just he Topaz final upscale that takes forever (16 hours for 1 hour of footage on a M1 Mac). On shorter projects, it's more doable and the savings would be real.

@kye, I couldn't agree more with your assessment of the situation. I wonder if there will be a fourth phase coming full circle where content creators go back to film. The more I think about it, I think the consumer push for 4k has been a direct response to the low res VHS and mini DV home videos, solving the "problem" of resolution that no one really had with 1080p- just insecurity. I also believe the same can be said for the amount of shallow DOF photography and video- something that was inaccessible in the past is now a cliché part in almost every production. Now that the iPhone can do it, I suppose there will be a resurgence of higher quality deep DOF content to differentiate. The part of this initial comparison that had me scratching my head was the "AI upresing". I've purchased and used Topaz's solution with amazing results with my DV footage from 2001-2011. I look at these comparisons and I can't help but think how we've seemingly only made baby steps from one iteration to the next with 2010 cameras giving 95% of the image of 2022 cameras when accounting for AI. Are we in a new phase where you're better off investing in primarily a better computer and software than a "next gen" camera? For that matter, investing in almost anything (lights, tripods, stands, etc.) makes more sense.

Business is business. You face the same fate as all other companies- make money or starve (depending on where you live). You do make an interesting point though: if the name of the game is to make money and 100% of your customers won't see a difference in quality, why not go with the least expensive solution that allows you to keep the most amount of money? For some people, they'll say "time and ease". Do you find you gain time or ease with the Fuji system? Just as a follow-up to make a few points from what others have said about M43: 1) All camera companies will eventually fail. New ones will always crop up as long as humans have eyes and ears. 2) Canon, Nikon, Sigma, Leica, Arri, Red, Balckmagic, Hasselblad and now OMDS (maybe others) have no plan B- meaning they must deliver on cameras and sales or die. Sony, Panasonic, Fuji, Ricoh could pull a Samsung and kill their camera division immediately. With this type of move, Sony E-mount, X-mount or K-mount would die. A Panasonic failure wouldn't kill M43 or L-mount. 3) Any existing great cameras and lenses will obviously continue to make great content as long as there's one working camera left and there's a will to do so. 4) If you buy your gear used (and you're savvy enough), you can probably sell it at little to no loss. Sometimes, you'll make money because sellers don't always know the value of their gear. Look for the bargain.

Yes, but not the lenses. I'm waiting to see what the OM-5 has to offer. Looking at the E-M5 iii, it encapsulated everything that M43 is- small enough, good enough quality, loaded with great features. If you're counting grams, the E-M5 iii is a good choice paired with inexpensive, small, primes. For the enthusiast, it's a camera that you want to take out. In a small bag under 1kg, I can cover 8mm to 300mm- that's really hard to do on FF (maybe impossible). Sure, you'll find a couple of lenses in each system, but I don't think you'll find all the lenses in one system. While those look like interesting cameras, I'm not certain they're a big enough leap over existing Fuji cameras. Having not used them though, I can't really say. However, everything you've said about OMDS/M43/Olympus, could equally be said about the Fuji system, except that it's closed and reliant on only Fuji making the bodies. M43 has many manufacturers across multiple continents being an open system. The lenses will continue to work for long time to come- no need to jump ship.

I think the problems will come for Olympus if used, small FF become widely available for less than a new OMDS camera. That'll be tough competition and they'd better have next-gen tech to go with the small sensor that's near impossible to put into a FF body. Will that happen? I also have my doubts. Still, it's not as though there's no need for something smaller than FF, which is the current message by many.

I find this feed amusing now in September after knowing what has happened. It was released March 18, 2022 and some people only got their camera in August, 2022 due to such high demand. The rumors are now that the OM5 will be released in late October. There have also been several lenses released and a new macro on the horizon. Unfortunately, they've "let go" of the general audience and went 200% on the niche markets where their cameras excel.

For me, I was amazed by the performance of the AI upscaling. It makes me think about something Rodney Charters said a long while back. Is it still relevant today?

The GH5 has been an iconic camera.. very close to a GH6 too. I think the point of that video is, when exposed and edited properly, you can get great results with any of them. I've purchased some of these old cameras (usually with a lens); then I sell the lens and get the camera for VERY cheap if not FREE or even make money in some cases. I like the challenge of doing great things with low-end gear rather than getting the most expensive gear with the expectation of fantastic results. That's just me, and I don't shoot professionally; so, there's that too.

Thanks again. This is one of my tools to squeak out the the very last bit of IQ from AVCHD.

Oh thank you so much!

Is there any chance you could post this again. The file was deleted. I'd really like to get it again.

I pretty much came to the same conclusion. It would seem that one could get a $100 used GH2 and lens, a speedbooster (not necessary), inexpensive lights, a computer that can edit 1080p Prores 422 with sufficient storage, and some AI software for upresing. With some talent, an eye for good images, and a story to tell, one could get in the game for well under $1000 in gear. Distribution is already taken care of with social. Amazing times.

Huge thanks! However, I need it for Mac... should have said that in my post. Sorry about that.

I can't seem to find a copy of 5DtoRGB Lite or Batch. I used this a long time ago with my AVCHD footage to squeak every little bit out of it. Does anyone have a copy? They don't have it around anymore.

I'm interested in knowing what people's thoughts are on this camera comparison.

I find it amusing how "hackers" are perceived by various companies. It sounds like Panasonic of 2009 viewed them as a potential opportunity to evolve whereas other companies (Canon, John Deere) try to stop them at all costs in order to protect their business model. I'm really rooting for Panasonic to succeed in the long-run (game over if they get PDAF in their bodies IMO).

Try DXO PhotoLab 5 (free to try). The ISO 1600 shot will be indistinguishable from ISO 200. ISO 6400 gets "acceptable" all of the sudden. I ditched Adobe 2 years ago and couldn't be happier.

In my experience, I don't mind lack of DR as long as the highlights look nice and graduated as they go from detail to no detail. If that line is harsh with unnatural colors, it looks very inorganic and unpleasant. Detail in the shadows is essential for me.