dantheman

I order a lot from them and they have very good customerservice but it seems that it takes longer to get new Panasonic camera's in stock, I ordered my g80 in October last year and they still have no stock of that camera. Not sure if they will have the same problems getting stock quickly from the GH5.

My best guess it's your NLE, I"m on windows 10 pro and edit with Edius 8WG, I can import and edit the 24, 30 and 60p files without a problem.

Thx for the info, I just wonder if the G80 or gx85 only is prone to these kind of artifacts or that you get this with a gh4 as well with very fast lenses (f0.95) or like in your case combined with a f1.4(?) and a speedbooster. I personally find chromatic aberration unacceptable, just because it can be very obvious and it looks ugly. In your video it was somewhat contained but a gx85 video I saw recently with a voightlander looked plain awefull. It even made me reconsider buying a voightlander.

Did you use a voightlander lens to shoot this? I have seen this before on a gx85 in combination with this type of lens while shooting wide open which is purple fringing, I see it in your video as well.

It was a paid upgrade before so it's nothing new, sony charges 500dollar for a 4K upgrade on their x70. Panasonic has always released their camera's at a very competitive pricepoint and cheaper then the competition so even with the VLOG upgrade it's still very good value for money, also, not everyone needs or wants VLOG and for those who do it's 100 dollar which is peanuts.

Is the wide shot from the side the gx85?

Looks nice! It looks like you used 2 camera's, are both the g80? I see you use the 18-35mm, Can I ask what type of speedbooster you use and if you like the lens for wedding use? I did see some shots where the focus was a bit off, is it hard to focus, or judge focus? I might get this lens as well to shoot weddings but need to know if the autofocus is reliable to use when pressing the shutter button.

Thx for the test, even 6400 iso looks fine to me, shooting at max 800iso is just not possible in real world situations unless you always have a light kit with you or you only shoot in daylight but this camera, just as the gx85 handles high iso's better then the gh4 does and makes shooting at 3200 or 6400 iso a possibility if you have no other choice, even if you have to deliver that footage to paying clients. I personally never had found the need to use neatvideo on any of my panasonics.

The g80 should not be that different from the gx85? Much depends on what you find acceptable, I have no issue to use 3200 iso on the gx85, even 6400 iso is usable for me.

Bruges or Brugge is my favorite city, have shot some video for fun a few times in that city. Good to know about the noise as I plan to shoot a lot at high iso since it's going to be used at weddings, my gx85 has performed admirably in that area, even better then my gh4 so I hope the g80 will do the same.

In my country (Belgium) the g80 is in stock in every major video store but I couldn't pass up on the deal I got in the UK, I get a free batterygrip and a 64gb 95mbs sandisc extreme pro card + the body is much cheaper as well, If I would have bought where I live I would have to pay 500euro more for the same contents so I don't mind being patient.

It looks a bit like a XT2 on steroids Looks great, I"m still waiting for my g80 to complement my gx85 which I ordered from CVP in the UK october last year, today the g80 is still not in stock.

I have downloaded that YT video and took out a frame from each camera, after they color corrected it, and eventhough the a6300 has some impressive DR and it deals almost equally well with highlights as the ursa 4.6k I much prefer the GH4 cine-d image over the sony s-log2, cine2 was even worse, the sony has that cold sterile look and somewhat bland colors, something that might be possible to correct through grading but just judging from what I see the gh4 has a much more pleasing look. The ursa 4.6k obviously has the best looking image where highlight handling stands out the most, that's where you see the 15 stops of DR at work..

On my windows phone it looks exactly the same as on my pc screen (viewed on windows 10), colors looked normal to me.

Yes, and? I have an opinion based on what I can see and I don't expect you to agree with me, at least I don't say his work sucks because he doesn't use a flash without even having seen his work.

I just see another way to light a subject but I only see this work in controlled situations with an assistant to hold a light and while standing very close to your subject, just like they do in this workshop. A not very realistic set up to shoot a entire weddingday if you ask me. The light seems useless if you shoot in a larger room like during a ceremony in church. It's just my opinion but the resulting pictures in this workshop are a bit "meh" to me, they don't wow me more then what I see some photographers achieve who only use a flash.

Show me, don't tell me. I still don't understand what makes your way so much better then all the others, like I said, I want to believe you but it would help a lot if you can show me an example of a weddingshoot (doesn't even have to be your own) that shows what you call progress.

It's not that I don't believe webrunner about the new light methods, as I don't have a photography background I obviously don't know what I am talking about, I can only tell what I see as a videographer working together with photographers. I can tell that some I have worked with are of a high end caliber, shooting for magazines in their own studio but doing weddings on the side. In their studio they use totally different light gear then they use on weddings but all of them, and I mean all, use a flash at weddings. To say that just because they use a flash their work must suck is nonsense, how can you even pass any judgment if you have not seen any photos?

Can you link to some of your work then? Just for me to see what "progress" really means. You don't need to post the links here, you can PM me.

Most of the photographers I work together with at weddings are professional, a few have been award winning for whatever that is worth but every single one of them uses either a flash on camera or has 2 separate flashes which they place separately or clamp onto something and which remotely are triggered from their camera, often they also use such an umbrella or whatever it's called. Now I don't have any experience shooting photos but when I look at some of their work, they certainly know what they are doing because their work is stunning. I"m not going to link to some of these photographers here but if you want I can send you a few links via pm so you can judge for yourself.

What lens do you normally use and at what f-stop do you shoot? Also, what's the average distance between camera and the product?

I thought webrunner was being sarcastic but I guess not? A high iso is not a replacement for using a flash for photography.

I had no idea that every single photographer I worked with the past 10 year got stuck in the 60's

For what it's worth, all high end wedding photographers I have worked with the past years have either Nikon or Canon, I have yet to see one that is using Sony, the past year it has been mainly canon 5DIII or 1Dx and in the Nikon camp the D750 seems to be very popular. Also, none of them care about super high iso's, they all use a flash.

When shooting weddings I would say there are quite a few situations where a good tracking autofocus could do wonders.