Panasonic GH4 w/ speedbooster xl worth it ?

[mercer]

3 minutes ago, Ebrahim Saadawi said:

28mm f/2 + GH4XL = 18mm f/1.2 m43s lens
35mm f2 + GH4XL = 22mm f/1.2 m43s lens

I have never owned a native lens, so I only think in terms of FF. Of course, I have a nice little set of ai lenses and with prices of the D5500 body dropping on eBay, I am tempted to have one camera that I don't need an adapter to use lenses. Not to mention, every where I turn, I read another good thing about that Nikon Flat profile. 

14 minutes ago, kidzrevil said:

I agree man. My gh4 work is some of the best I'd ever shot. Easy to grade & no macroblocking even when I stacked luts on my footage. I guess I will just have to take the grain as its shortcoming and get over it. Cinelike V was a dream on that thing ! Im not totally ruling out the NX1 there's gotta be a piece to the puzzle im missing or something. I've been playing with Gamma C and loving it and I got a bunch of stuff lined up for when i get back to NY next month so we'll see. The stills quality and resolution has me hesitant to let it go but the Gh4 with speedbooster sounds like the most reliable option on the market. For me at least

 

 

CinelikeV? Really? I thought CinelikeD is supposed to be the better profile for grading? And I actually like the noise on the gh4, add a little  fine gorilla grain and it blends nicely. 

[kidzrevil]

4 minutes ago, mercer said:

I have never owned a native lens, so I only think in terms of FF. Of course, I have a nice little set of ai lenses and with prices of the D5500 body dropping on eBay, I am tempted to have one camera that I don't need an adapter to use lenses. Not to mention, every where I turn, I read another good thing about that Nikon Flat profile. 

CinelikeV? Really? I thought CinelikeD is supposed to be the better profile for grading? And I actually like the noise on the gh4, add a little  fine gorilla grain and it blends nicely. 

Nah bro my style is to get the look as close as possible in cam than push it a lil further with the grade. Makes sense to get 75% of the look when shoot 8bit instead of shooting "25%" super flat and undersaturated to get to the same finished look ! Yur damaging the footage. Cinelike V on GH4 and Gamma C on NX1 is the secret sauce

 

[mercer]

12 minutes ago, kidzrevil said:

Nah bro my style is to get the look as close as possible in cam than push it a lil further with the grade. Makes sense to get 75% of the look when shoot 8bit instead of shooting "25%" super flat and undersaturated to get to the same finished look ! Yur damaging the footage. Cinelike V on GH4 and Gamma C on NX1 is the secret sauce

 

Yeah, definitely good stuff. I'll have to try CinelikeV next. Natural is pretty nice too. 

[boxtree]

That makes so much sense, could you share your cineV settings please kidzrevil 

Thanks 

B

[kidzrevil]

19 hours ago, mercer said:

Yeah, definitely good stuff. I'll have to try CinelikeV next. Natural is pretty nice too. 

Natural with -4 contrast, -1 saturation sharpness and noise reduction all the way down is my prefered "flat" image

[DPStewart]

23 hours ago, mercer said:

Yeah I have heard the Roxsen can suffer from that as well. I really like lens flares, is there a good chance that any shot where I attempt to get lens flares, I would also get the blue dot?

This is a video I shot with the NX500 and the Tokina 24-40mm... Do you think I would have the blue dot issue with a similar video?

Mercer,
The shots at :25 and at :48 - YES. 
Those are good examples of the conditions that will definitely produce the blue blob on the Mitakon Version 1. I can't speak for the newer version as I've never had a chance to use one.

[mercer]

15 minutes ago, DPStewart said:

Mercer,
The shots at :25 and at :48 - YES. 
Those are good examples of the conditions that will definitely produce the blue blob on the Mitakon Version 1. I can't speak for the newer version as I've never had a chance to use one.

Thanks, Stew. It may just be better to save up for the metabones. Much appreciated, you saved me a bunch of headaches. 

[TheRenaissanceMan]

I shoot into light all the time with my Roxsen speed booster and have never seen a blue dot. I hear it's a non-issue with the RJ as well.

[Guest Ebrahim Saadawi]

23 hours ago, mercer said:

I have never owned a native lens, so I only think in terms of FF. Of course, I have a nice little set of ai lenses and with prices of the D5500 body dropping on eBay, I am tempted to have one camera that I don't need an adapter to use lenses. Not to mention, every where I turn, I read another good thing about that Nikon Flat profile. 

If you want the FF equivalent:

That 18mm f/1.2 m43s lens on a m43s 4k body will give you the same look (FOV & DOF) as a FF 40mm F2.8 lens on a FF camera. with f/1.2 exposure
That 22mm f/1.2 m43s lens on a m43s 4k body will give you the same look (FOV & DOF) as a FF 50mm F2.8 lens on a FF camera. with f/1.2 exposure

One of these lenses is great a m43s body shooting 4K as a standard 50mm eq. fast prime. (having both is pretty un-needed, the 22mm will be better)

And yes I have Nikkor glass and I own the D5300 for these lenses to be used on a lovely large s35 sensor. The look is exactly similar to a Speedboosted m43s 4k camera, but without the need to use a SB (in fact the whole camera with a good wide kit lens is as much as a speedbooster cost alone), and the dynamic range & noise performance & colours are better, very clean s35 1080p. Having a native active F mount camera makes the math much easier if you think in FF terms. A Nikkor Ai-s 50mm f/1.8 on a D5300 = 85mm f/2.8, etc.

Being an active mount, you get Image stabilization which you don't get with the SB-ed m43s (you need the Canon SB & Canon lenses to get s35 with IS on a m43s, which are too essential features I need in my camera, s35 aesthetic and IS). 
 

The GH4 + Canon XL speedbooster + Canon new s35 lenses and IS lenses is an awesome combination for s35 4K. 

For use with Nikkor primes, I don't really think it's as good of a proposition as Nikon offers cheap, already s35 cameras, unless you really need the higher resolution of a m43s body (at which case instead of a cheap Nikon body you'll need a G7/GH4 + expensive SB XL, and you lose all electronics incl. IS/VR)

BTW:

CinelikeD is my least favourite profile. Orange people.

My most favourite is Neutral dialed all the way down and I grade in post (yes all the way down even saturation. I found you can increase saturation in post again with zero penalty but you can't decrease it when colours get clipped, so -4 saturation just gives me higher DR to work with, same with contrast and sharpness. Can be added but not substracted)

And no worries, GH4 4K flat images can be pushed to any look you want, very solid, especially with neat-video to use when the image breaks up here or there (occasionally happens with any camera)

With Nikon my favourite is Standard dialed all the way down with -1 hue, or Flat if it's there. Both give excellent colours & DR and need so little grading as they look so good you can't get your heart to change it/grade it to look different. 

[mercer]

49 minutes ago, Ebrahim Saadawi said:

If you want the FF equivalent:

That 18mm f/1.2 m43s lens on a m43s 4k body will give you the same look (FOV & DOF) as a FF 40mm F2.8 lens on a FF camera. with f/1.2 exposure
That 22mm f/1.2 m43s lens on a m43s 4k body will give you the same look (FOV & DOF) as a FF 50mm F2.8 lens on a FF camera. with f/1.2 exposure

One of these lenses is great a m43s body shooting 4K as a standard 50mm eq. fast prime. (having both is pretty un-needed, the 22mm will be better)

And yes I have Nikkor glass and I own the D5300 for these lenses to be used on a lovely large s35 sensor. The look is exactly similar to a Speedboosted m43s 4k camera, but without the need to use a SB (in fact the whole camera with a good wide kit lens is as much as a speedbooster cost alone), and the dynamic range & noise performance & colours are better, very clean s35 1080p. Having a native active F mount camera makes the math much easier if you think in FF terms. A Nikkor Ai-s 50mm f/1.8 on a D5300 = 85mm f/2.8, etc.

Being an active mount, you get Image stabilization which you don't get with the SB-ed m43s (you need the Canon SB & Canon lenses to get s35 with IS on a m43s, which are too essential features I need in my camera, s35 aesthetic and IS). 
 

The GH4 + Canon XL speedbooster + Canon new s35 lenses and IS lenses is an awesome combination for s35 4K. 

For use with Nikkor primes, I don't really think it's as good of a proposition as Nikon offers cheap, already s35 cameras, unless you really need the higher resolution of a m43s body (at which case instead of a cheap Nikon body you'll need a G7/GH4 + expensive SB XL, and you lose all electronics incl. IS/VR)

BTW:

CinelikeD is my least favourite profile. Orange people.

My most favourite is Neutral dialed all the way down and I grade in post (yes all the way down even saturation. I found you can increase saturation in post again with zero penalty but you can't decrease it when colours get clipped, so -4 saturation just gives me higher DR to work with, same with contrast and sharpness. Can be added but not substracted)

And no worries, GH4 4K flat images can be pushed to any look you want, very solid, especially with neat-video to use when the image breaks up here or there (occasionally happens with any camera)

With Nikon my favourite is Standard dialed all the way down with -1 hue, or Flat if it's there. Both give excellent colours & DR and need so little grading as they look so good you can't get your heart to change it/grade it to look different. 

Thanks Ebrahim, I actually have the G7, not the gh4 and I own only vintage lenses. I have a small set of Nikkors, Tokina AT-X zooms, RMC Tokina prime and zoom lenses, a nice set of Minolta MDs, a few Takumars, some C-Mount lenses, and others. 

So far I have been happy with CinelikeD, the skin tones are manageable, but definitely tend to run a little red. My next test is to give Natural a thorough run. I'll definitely give the dial down a go. Of course, even in CinelikeD with contrast at 0, I have found that I still need to add more contrast in post. Not to mention, when contrast is too low, the focus peaking becomes very weak.

As far as the D5500 is concerned, the body is selling for $487 on eBay, if/when it drops below $450, I will probably buy one. A nice, clean S35 image, with native glass and 60p for short films with web delivery sounds very appealing to me. I have seen some very impressive videos on Vimeo with clean shadows and surprisingly good DR. I wish it had focus peaking, but I have read that there is a "green dot" focus confirmation in the viewfinder, that works with manual lenses... Is that true?

Anyway, thanks again Ebrahim!

[Guest Ebrahim Saadawi]

Yes if the point lights when the camera thinks it achieved focus, but it's too inaccurate to be useful for me. However, I find focusing with the 3.2" LCD is quite easy. 

[kidzrevil]

@Ebrahim Saadawi If shooting flat works for you fine, I still highly advise againt it with 8bit cameras. Flat especially on gh exaggerates noise. As far as the speedbooster is concerned I really just want to know if people think the benefit of the extra stop, resolution and field of view is apparent and how does it compare to a true s35 sensors. If I can get an identical field of view as my s35 NX1 with an extra stop a gh4 or gh5 (down the line) will replace my NX camera

[Guest Ebrahim Saadawi]

Yes they're two schools of shooting. For grading or as close as possible to output. Both have their benefits but I don't use the later because no in-camera look/grade is even remotely close to what I have it the final output. So starting to grade contrasty saturated sharpened image that's close to rec 709 is not an option. Different ways of working.

And yes the GH4 SB really does turn it into a S35 sensor when you use FF ef/Nikkor glass. Exact S35 image characteristics, identical to what you'd have got if the GH4 was made with a Canon ef mount and a APS-C size sensor (just minus the ability to use aps-c/ef-s glass).

A Canon 50mm f/1.8 on a GHSB will give the exact same field of view and depth of field (look/aesthetic) as a Canon 50mm f/1.8 used on a dumb NX1 adapter,

and it will even have brighter exposure (f/1.2 exposure) advantage too over the real s35 nx1.

The images will be identical aesthetically (FOV&DOF) and the differences will be colour rendition of cameras/rolling shutter/DR/sharpness/low-light sensor qualities of course. 

 

[PannySVHS]

8 hours ago, Ebrahim Saadawi said:

 

And no worries, GH4 4K flat images can be pushed to any look you want, very solid, especially with neat-video to use when the image breaks up here or there (occasionally happens with any camera)

 

Hey guys,

Yesterday I did some grading to relax- it´s still cold ouside, so nothing better than to enjoy some tea in front of Davinci:)

I came across a very underexposed and wrongly white-balanced shot. Filming was done with the Panasonic G6 in Natural all -2 but color at 0.

I think, quiet amazing, though some posterization and false color cannot be ignored! So I bet GH4 would be a fantastic camera in many ways and

natural is a tested and well received profile.

 

[mercer]

2 hours ago, PannySVHS said:

 

Hey guys,

Yesterday I did some grading to relax- it´s still cold ouside, so nothing better than to enjoy some tea in front of Davinci:)

I came across a very underexposed and wrongly white-balanced shot. Filming was done with the Panasonic G6 in Natural all -2 but color at 0.

I think, quiet amazing, though some posterization and false color cannot be ignored! So I bet GH4 would be a fantastic camera in many ways and

natural is a tested and well received profile.

 

You pulled that back nicely. What lens were you using there, Panny? Also, since the WB was set to incandescent, you have the perfect recipe to try a day for night shot. Would like to see how that would look. And yes, I have got to give natural a good test. I know I am in the minority, but every time I take out my G7, with the intention to test other profiles, I end up with cinelikeD dialed in. 

[Cinegain]

Dunno, looks kinda off (here). I'd personally like it more somewhere in this general direction:

[mercer]

I think somewhere in between is the sweet spot. I like your skin tone better, and contrast... She really pops from the background, but I like Panny's yellowish sky... It looks like an early 2000s spy thriller. 

[André Eriksson]

Was bored and did some grading, with a slight warm touch. Nice grain from the camera.  

I would really like to learn how to remove the blueish hue from the tree branches in the sky...

 

 

[PannySVHS]

7 hours ago, mercer said:

You pulled that back nicely. What lens were you using there, Panny? Also, since the WB was set to incandescent, you have the perfect recipe to try a day for night shot. Would like to see how that would look. And yes, I have got to give natural a good test. I know I am in the minority, but every time I take out my G7, with the intention to test other profiles, I end up with cinelikeD dialed in. 

Hey mercer, thanks:) Was going for a more stylized look. Day to night wouldnt hurt to put up some night like lights for sculpting the scene. Other than that low exposure and done:) Scene was shot with a Canon FD 50mm 1.4.

 

7 hours ago, Cinegain said:

Dunno, looks kinda off (here). I'd personally like it more somewhere in this general direction:

 

Hey, that is a very nice approach. I was falling into the redish and hazy contrast too much:) Wanted to promote the idea that the GH4 would be indeed a very liable decision, showing what a G6 under extreme conditions is capable of. Maybe thatfore my "intense" grade:) Did you pull the grade off the ungraded or the graded shot?

 

5 hours ago, André Eriksson said:

Was bored and did some grading, with a slight warm touch. Nice grain from the camera.  

I would really like to learn how to remove the blueish hue from the tree branches in the sky...

 

 

 

Hey, with Cinegain, you (and me as well:) we got some nice looking filmic gestalt out off that G6! So one more proof that G6 and GH4 more so

are pretty gradeable. Bluish hue from branches could be eliminated in Davinci by combining a Hue vs Hue via colorpicker and a mask for protecting the rest of the scene.

[Cinegain]

19 minutes ago, PannySVHS said:

Hey mercer, thanks:) Was going for a more stylized look. Day to night wouldnt hurt to put up some night like lights for sculpting the scene. Other than that low exposure and done:) Scene was shot with a Canon FD 50mm 1.4.

 

Hey, that is a very nice approach. I was falling into the redish and hazy contrast too much:) Wanted to promote the idea that the GH4 would be indeed a very liable decision, showing what a G6 under extreme conditions is capable of. Maybe thatfore my "intense" grade:) Did you pull the grade off the ungraded or the graded shot?

 

 

Hey, with Cinegain, you (and me as well:) we got some nice looking filmic gestalt out off that G6! So one more proof that G6 and GH4 more so

are pretty gradeable. Bluish hue from branches could be eliminated in Davinci by combining a Hue vs Hue via colorpicker and a mask for protecting the rest of the scene.

From the original ungraded one. Messed around in photoshop with color balance for RGB values individually for highlights, midtones and shadow. Then add another adjustment layer for exposure. Just eyeballing. It's nicer if you actually do the grading in FCP/Premiere or Resolve with waveforms/scopes, but since it was a still I went for quickly adjusting it that way. Indeed it was more of a recovery according my taste of what I feel the scene might've been like. Taking in as well a gloomy cold winter day and trying to convey that feel just a little.

But yeah, I fell in love with the GH2 and am still true to Panasonic MFT as my main choice of gear. Although that might change soon with the arrival of the A6300 which I'm really tempted to get. I never worked with Sony material before, so it will be interesting.