John Matthews

Hallo @PannySVHS (German?), Truth be told... I'm not an expert filmmaker or colorist. I'm just an English teacher who really likes filmmaking. When I purchased the GX80, I was very attracted to its feature set and form-factor. Now, I'm trying to find the best way to get the most our of it, either as a gradable image or straight from camera. The way I have been trying for a gradable image (with filmconvert because it's easy) was to look into the red, blue, and green channels separately to evaluate them. My informal evaluation showed this: the GX80 has a tendency for a noisy blue channel and a red channel with almost a "halo" effect to it. I know this because I downloaded camera files from expensive cameras to compare. So for the WB A3G3 (which was a recommendation from @Inazuma) I could see that the blue channel got increased just a tad, keeping it further away from the bottom 5% IRE values in FCPX; hence, it had less clipping. IMO, the closer you get to the bottom or top 5% IRE, the more chances of clipping. I also liked the greens I could get after grading. This is interesting, Kamil. I think I've seen the "plastic" look you're talking about, but not so much on the GX80 (or Panasonic) files. I've been told this before: don't reduce the saturation too much on a 8bit file... but why? I thought it was more about banding. Can you explain more? Also, some say with 8bit: "get as close to the final image you want in-camera." So, what are people shooting S-log, V-log, C-log? They've all got 8-bit versions, supposedly "ready" for grading, all of which look really flat and unusable out of camera. Personally, I'm just trying to get the best, consistent, gradable image from the GX80 using it as the only "tool" I have? Since, Mr. Reid isn't publishing a more detailed review on its IQ, matters must be taken into my own hands. Any other suggestions?

Concerning white balance and other settings, I've been using Sunny (A3G3) and Tungsten(A3G3), depending on the project. I'm of the school of thought to maintain consistency and just stick with it, letting colors fall where they may. @Inazuma came up with A3G3. The reason for my using it was due to the blue channel dipping into the 0%-5%. Panasonic's implementation of the 8-bit codec is excellent, but there just isn't much information in that range because it (correctly) put most of the information in the 5%-95% range. The same thing happens at the 95%-100%. @jase is using a Tiffen filter to lower the contrast even further... resulting in a nice effect too. Finally, I think it's almost a toss-up between Standard or Natural, as long as everything is set at -5, the channels will be clean. I gave Natural a slight edge though.

Good to hear it doesn't feel big. It probably helps with IS too. From the video I posted earlier, it looks like you have a sweet setup. Good luck with all the editing, hopefully not as tiring as in the photo!

Given their weight and size, I think you're right in waiting for the GH5. It seems like a better fit. The GX80 is, IMO, just a smaller option instead of the GH5... for those don't want/need to deal with logs or size. From what I hear, it's going to have at least all of the features of the GX80 with a super-fast processor in a bigger body... probably right up your alley.

I know there are some fans of the Voigtlander lenses on this thread. Here are some comparisons between them and Olympus's offerings.

Some of those shots practically look like they're on a tripod, a testament to this as a low-light setup. Looks nice.

I'm steering away from Adobe products ever since CC became their thing. I just prefer the pay-for-it-once model. Also, their site got hacked and I doubt it ever going to be secure. For that, they'd have to pay for and manage security experts, not to mention secure their other software (flash, etc.). I like using FCPX, but I've recently decided that I won't be letting it manage my catalogue of videos. I tried this, but it just became too cumbersome. Now, I'm using it to just work on the videos for one specific project. The finder makes more sense to me, especially when backing up. Its ability to sync audio, use Filmconvert, and make my edits are the primary reasons for using it. I'm still looking for free solutions when I make my imminent switch to Linux.

I've heard this before... Maybe the 12-32 would be a better match. Bonus- it's super cheap second hand, rather small, and allows me to try out DUAL IS. The big point for me is that I'd like to have something a little wider and smaller in my kit. The 25mm is a fantastic lens and I've been really happy, especially considering what I paid for it new. My telephoto is a Pentax M 50mm F1.7 (bought it for $30), also a very nice lens with a great feature of being almost a macro lens when you put a reversal ring on it.

I believe it's Sigma's 30mm F1.4. Yeah, not sure why the want the US market to stick only to the 12-32. I would also like to have this lens, but I was going for low-light, indoor stuff too. I imagine when sales start slowing a little, they'll have a body-only option and then you can pick up the 25mm like I did. My next lens will probably be the Panasonic-Leica 15mm or the 12-32 although the 20mm f1.7 could potentially replace my 25mm and still give me a wide enough shot... choices- something the Sony folk don't quite have.

I took a look at his shots and he's using the same setup as I am for this shot GX80 + Panasonic 25mm F1.7. It's the sharpest combo I've ever used, out resolving my old RX100 (20MP). I got this package for under 700 Euros- IMO, deal of the year. If one's looking into this form-factor, for the money, it can't be beat in terms of photo quality + video quality.

Hey, if you like, you like it- that should trump everything else. I might try it too, just to see what it gives, but I think the most important is to simply be consistent within a project.

Thanks for the credit, but I haven't been using "cloudy" WB. I use Sunny instead. I've also been doing more tests with the A3G3.

Where can I go to teach myself about this? Finished downloading the file and looking at in FCPX, it looks highly detailed, but whenever there's movement of any kind, blocks start appearing around the detail- looks like crud. Let's hope this isn't representative of Fuji "fixing" issues with aliasing. Let's hope this isn't what the final product will be!

The reason I asked this was due to a Panasonic rep saying users never really need to turn off IBIS; so, I guess it's true!

I know that it's usually better with 4k, but I saw moiré a few times on the a6300 in normal review footage. I'm thinking this Fuji would be more prone to moiré, given a seemingly sharper image... could be wrong though. It also sounds like Fuji made this a top priority; so, we'll see...

Didn't the previous Fuji have full sensor readout when it was 1080p? I remember looking at it and thinking it was really a shame that it had a really nice image, yet corrupted due to moiré and aliasing (really bad too)... I hope they fixed that issue. I'm betting just the fact it's 4k will make it better than that previous model. But man, that image seemed so sharp! I hope there's a way to "calm" it down a little.

Based on current prices, this looks like the situation for 4k shooters in this form-factor... £509 - GX80 - nice 4k, IBIS, no overheating, BUT bad rolling shutter, no mic input, crop £930 - A6300 - nice 4k, AF in video, mic input BUT overheats (lottery), horrible rolling shutter £1399 - X-T2 - nice 4k, mic input, no overheating(?), who knows? BUT Rolling shutter (how bad?), aliasing (know for this?), bad moiré (known for this?), who knows?

Yes... kinda... Set it to MF and you'll notice a AF button on the screen that is touch sensitive- it will pull your focus. What I like about this implementation is that you'll probably not notice any noise or shake in the footage.

Was it just me or did the video look too sharp? Maybe you can adjust that... Overall, it looks quite promising. I also wonder if they had to pay Panasonic any patent money... why couldn't Sony make a camera that didn't overheat? I think something's up.

I've heard some reports recently concerning IBIS. Normally, when you use a tripod, you turn IBIS off. But, has anyone tried to use IBIS on a tripod? I've been told it doesn't matter with the GX80 and it doesn't get "confused." By accident, I did this once and found no ill effects on the image.

@Michael Coffee No disrespect, but I think we just have different tastes in what looks "awesome" or "right." IMO, these are reference snapshots at best, maybe a nice reminder of a day you spent together to remember a person's face... nothing striking in terms of the tech of the 7D & 70-200 and frankly they could have been shot with any camera or phone. In terms of video, ANY camera Canon is offering right now under 1 grand wouldn't be even in the same ball park as the GX80. They're just too light on features and IQ for 2016. Maybe the 5DM4 will be available at a decent price... we'll see, but I have my doubts.

Thanks for the input Michael. I would seriously doubt if a 50d or 5D III would knock the socks off a GX80 in terms of anything, when talking about the final product of a print or "getting the shot" experience. Not saying they would do poorly either. Photography tech is at a point today (even 5 years ago) at which the "problem" is no longer the camera. Medium-sized wall prints can be had with amazing quality and ease- probably rating up with the medium format cameras of yesteryear. Back then, if just one part of the process went sour, your print would suffer. Now, the process has been perfected. It would be crazy to say MFT can't take an exposition quality photo; hell, if a phone can do it, why couldn't MFT?

From a pure photography point of view, the D5500 is better. How much better? We're talking single percentage points better. However, when you compare the feature set of the Panasonic for photography and video (minus microphone input), the Panasonic offers much more, especially for video. I'll also say that 4k trumps flat profile. Get a good external recorder and enjoy great sound. There's my take on it. I looked at the D5500, but came to the conclusion that video isn't Nikon's bread and butter. The GX80 offers cutting-edge 2016 tech and features for a crazy price.

In my opinion, stellar. Some will say EM5II is ever-so-slightly better, but that's 1080p. You get 16MP. That's enough for some very large wall prints. How big do you need? A few years ago, I was using tricks like UniWB to get an accurate reading of a histogram so that I wouldn't blow out highlights- this camera doesn't need that trick. It's very much WYSIWYG from what you see on the screen. However, MFT sensors aren't really know for their DR abilities, but this one does a great job keeping highlights down and telling you the truth about when they go over. Having shot many cameras in RAW for the past 8 years, I've seen better pure performance, but they were more of a lottery when you got it on the computer. Finally, the GX80's JPEG's actually look remarkably similar in DR to the RAW's- and that's a good thing.

This has already been posted on this thread and I wish they'd tested the video AF on a tripod.