John Matthews

@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.

Not sure if that's quite right. Do you mean Canon EF mount compatible? I believe the Sigma lenses (18-35, 50-100 F1.8) work, but in quirky ways... either IS working and no AF or vis-versa. Metabones lists the lenses that work on their site- refer to that. None of them will be DUAL IS enabled; and I think the challenge will be making sure that the correct focal length is communicated to IBIS, especially working with zooms. For example, the Sigma 18-35 used at 23.5mm would need to communicate: 23.5(current focal length) x 2.22(GX80 crop in 4k) x .63(speedbooster XL reducer). I'd buy from Amazon so you can send it back and please tell us what you think. The AF on all these speedbooster/lens combos are not the same level of performance as native mount lenses. I doubt that I'll ever go this route. I'd rather have good AF and slightly less DOF- low light isn't a problem for me anymore. The MFT lenses, as far as I know, all use fly-by-wire... though some of them are so good at it that I'd challenge someone to tell the difference.

Really nice shot. Great colors.

I second that. Shooting in monochrome with WB set to sunny in Custom 1 setting, WB set to tungsten in Custom 2 setting. It works well for my needs. I also have peaking set to low and red. I can't always see with shallow depth of field, but of the time I can. I'll say it again- this camera (form-factor, etc.) was made to be used primarily with its LCD, not the EVF. The latter is only a back-up when you can't use the other. This doesn't really happen to me very often... only in bright sunlight when trying to manual focus- that's it. The EM5II is more of what @fuzzynormal is looking for if he wants to use it as a EVF camera... just no 4k... If I were he, I'd get the G7 or wait for better IBIS from some other device.

Thanks for the review @fuzzynormal. You mentioned the EVF and the lack of proper sound- both of which many have conceded as being the drawbacks of the GX80. Cameralabs mentioned the field sequential EVF as more of a design limit of having the flat top (no hump like the EM5II). We've talked about syncing before and, as more of a hobbyist, it's not a big deal for me. What I'm wondering though is when you import your sound files and then your video, doesn't your NLE organise the files so they appear next to each other? In my case with FCPX, I get an audio file right next to the video file. I select them and sync. I suppose with 100s of files this might become cumbersome. Have you tried just keeping the audio going non-stop and just letting the video files attach to it in post? There should be some sort of technical solution. If both devices have the same time stamp, I don't see why this couldn't be done.

This is true. It's taking the light and condensing it onto a smaller sensor than the lens was designed for... a crazy-useful trick that results in more light on the sensor and less DOF. In my case, I'm just saving for a native, wide-angle lens for the moment. Shallow DOF and low light are not my issues- content and budget are.

Onboard will have what sounds like a faucet running in the distance due to the IBIS. When in a windy situation, you'll need to find a way to protect the microphones. Other than those limitations, all is good. Seriously, external solutions are the only way to go. The audio is good enough for syncing, but that's about it. Personally, I don't have any problem working this way and making that little extra effort for good audio pays off.

I concur. Sensor size has nothing to do with focal length. Sensor size will determine only how much of the projected light coming from the lens is recorded.

Concerning colors and the GX80, I'm impressed the most with the reds- they seem to really pop- deeply saturated, yet not overblown. For me, the blue channel is its weak point. Overall, I appreciate the Standard profile the most, but the Natural profile seems to be the most gradable, especially concerning those blues.

Another review. This one by Steve Huff... I like his not-so-scientific views on cameras and handling. He also did a write-up: http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2016/06/24/shooting-with-the-panasonic-gx85-small-with-a-huge-punch/

Welcome, @Javier López, to posting on EOSHD! It would seem you chose Filmconvert settings similar to mine and @jase. However, we preferred without noise added. My logic is this: why add noise when this sensor does a pretty good job unless it's for a desired look or feel? Strictly personal taste... Great video nonetheless! Also, your English is fine (I'm an English teacher).

The GX80 is one of the most popular cameras on EOSHD if the number of views on its threads is an indicator. This thread has been going strong for quite some time. I doubt the GH5 is going to be at Photokina, given that the EM1 II launch has been delayed until early 2017. The GX80 is all we got right now; so, let's give it our undivided attention.

I think I found out what went wrong with my ffmpeg command. I had to remove "-sws_dither none \" and it worked. That said, it helped my computer only a little. I think I'll be purchasing a fast/large SSD and stick with the 4k. I will say for anyone thinking that a Panasonic image looks "too video-like," downscaling footage to 1080p, then upscaling to 4k will help everything to look more organic- just a hint of softness at 4k resolution. There's a loss of some detail, but it's damn good 1080p! Anyway, here's the working script: ffmpeg -i INPUT -filter_complex 'extractplanes=y+u+v[y][v]; scale=w=3840:h=2160:flags=print_info+neighbor+bitexact [us]; [v] scale=w=3840:h=2160:flags=print_info+neighbor+bitexact [vs]; [y][us][vs]mergeplanes=0x001020:yuv444p,format=pix_fmts=yuv444p10le,scale=w=1920:h=1080:flags=print_info+bicubic+full_chroma_inp+full_chroma_int' \ -q 0 -quant_mat hq \ -c:v prores_ks -profile:v 4 \ -c:a copy \ -c:s copy \ OUTPUT

Just thought I'd share this link concerning the limitations of such a large sensor and shallow mount. Eventually, physics and practicality will have its role to play. http://petapixel.com/2016/06/27/developing-zoom-lens-x1d-almost-impossible-says-hasselblad/

I researched this some time ago. For Youtube (don't know about other services), the max allowed bitrate for 4k 24-30p is 35-45Mbps. Youtube, in turn, will downscale when they "process" your video. Numerous youtubers have noted that when you upload 4k and let youtube downscale, the results are better than when you upload 1080p 8Mbps. I concur on these results. In short, you want to upload to the absolute maximum that the service provides as those are the limitations of the service. For Facebook, maybe try here: http://www.macxdvd.com/mac-dvd-video-converter-how-to/best-video-format-for-facebook.htm Also remember that Facebook declares ownership of anything you upload to its services... not nice. Looks good, but unfortunately I refuse to use Microsoft Windows. Bummer... really want ffmpeg command...

Yes, I've been doing the same with FCPX. However, my computer (integrated graphics) has a hard time with 4k with any sort modification to the original file. For now, I'm just testing as to what I can do with a downscaled image. I, too, am trying to improve workflow to make my cuts go a little quicker in FCPX, especially when 4k is not needed (rarely is). When uploading to Youtube, you want 4k, even if it was originally 1080p- you only need to add a little grain and youtube will see "4k" detail. The results are pretty good from tests I've seen.

That really sucks and it must feel awful! ...I will say this after having lived in France for some time. If I were you, I'd check leboncoin.fr. It's the go-to site in France for buying and selling stuff. I'm sure there's all kinds of stolen stuff on it. You might find your gear and be able to alert the authorities. The other option is to just chalk this one up as "lost forever" ... and this will be an opportunity to get some new gear!

Does anyone know if it's still a "thing" to downscale 4k to 1080p for easier editing and improved video 1080p quality? If so, do you have an ffmpeg command that would work with the GX80? My old ffmpeg command for doing this doesn't work and I don't know why. This is what I got so far: ffmpeg -i INPUT -filter_complex 'extractplanes=y+u+v[y][v]; scale=w=3840:h=2160:flags=print_info+neighbor+bitexact [us]; [v] scale=w=3840:h=2160:flags=print_info+neighbor+bitexact [vs]; [y][us][vs]mergeplanes=0x001020:yuv444p,format=pix_fmts=yuv444p10le,scale=w=1920:h=1080:flags=print_info+bicubic+full_chroma_inp+full_chroma_int' \ -sws_dither none \ -q 0 -quant_mat hq \ -c:v prores_ks -profile:v 4 \ -c:a copy \ -c:s copy \ OUTPUT

I can understand. ISO 800 almost requires ND filter for everything but indoor or studio stuff (I assume you're talking about your beloved BMPCC). Maybe the next version (if it ever comes) will be what you want. The tools keep getting better and cheaper... when will it stop? The search goes on for the perfect camera for Gunpowder. Keep up the great work you do.

Would I be wrong in saying the problem of low light has been solved for the majority of us? We have great high ISO performance, speedboosters, and fast lenses. What is the new frontier? Codecs, stabilization, color rendition, DR? These cameras make me wonder where we're going next. Is it going to be 3D, VR, something else? Gimmicks?

Yes. No problem. Put it in "M" mode and save it as a custom mode. You can adjust your aperture and shutter independently. I wasn't aware of the GX8 limitation...