An adventure into the Panasonic GX85/80 begins - and a look at the Leica Nocticron for Micro Four Thirds

[mercer]

18 minutes ago, John Matthews said:

Have you tried comparing no IS and IBIS, never actually turning on the E-stabalization? If you see no difference, your device might be faulty.

Yeah, it's definitely functioning. I just messed with it for a while with different lenses, it seems better now than with my quick test yesterday, but nowhere near as good as with e-stabilization on.

With normal stabilization, I have to really concentrate on staying steady. With e-stabilizer, I can just shoot. I also can confirm that it seems to definitely handle pitch and yaw better with e-stabilizer on.

I really think there is something strange with how they are describing the 5-Axis IBIS. From the picture you posted, it clearly shows that there is 5-axis IBIS in the body, but it is also a graphic just demonstrating Dual-IS. In fact, I have yet to find any information from Panasonic that mentions 5-Axis without mentioning Dual-IS in the same sentence or graphic.

I understand Panasonic manuals can be confusing, but in this instance, it is clearly stated that 5-Axis, in movie mode, is obtained through e-stabilization and the symbol for normal IBIS clearly defines it as only being 3-Axis of stabilization.

Something is suspect here.

[John Matthews]

10 minutes ago, mercer said:

Yeah, it's definitely functioning. I just messed with it for a while with different lenses, it seems better now than with my quick test yesterday, but nowhere near as good as with e-stabilization on.

With normal stabilization, I have to really concentrate on staying steady. With e-stabilizer, I can just shoot. I also can confirm that it seems to definitely handle pitch and yaw better with e-stabilizer on.

I really think there is something strange with how they are describing the 5-Axis IBIS. From the picture you posted, it clearly shows that there is 5-axis IBIS in the body, but it is also a graphic just demonstrating Dual-IS. In fact, I have yet to find any information from Panasonic that mentions 5-Axis without mentioning Dual-IS in the same sentence or graphic.

I understand Panasonic manuals can be confusing, but in this instance, it is clearly stated that 5-Axis, in movie mode, is obtained through e-stabilization and the symbol for normal IBIS clearly defines it as only being 3-Axis of stabilization.

Something is suspect here.

Just a couple of thoughts... IBIS is only taking out my micro-jitters for me and offering a "gentle floating" to the video. If I move too much, you can see it. I can't walk and film really. Focus is always going to be a challenge- the GX80 will NOT autofocus on a moving subject if the camera itself is moving, manual focus is the only way.

I agree that the marketing material is confusing and cagey at best. Nevermind the number of inquiries from us to know more about the HDMI port and codecs. They just don't answer. Nevertheless, I fully checked this out months ago before buying GX80. Andrew checked on this, along with countless reviewers to confirm 5-axis IBIS. My understanding of E-stabalization is that the camera takes a further crop, moving around the image on a X and Y axis on the sensor to further stabalize, meaning it's Hybrid 5-axis is 5-axis + extra stabalization (but it crops). Pitch and yaw would require sensor movements to compensate. I've never heard of software compensating for pitch and yaw.

However, where do you see that "Body IBIS" is only 3-axis? I only read "normal" IBIS is "Camera shake is corrected for up/down, left/right, and rotational movements." On the face of that phrase, it sounds like 3-axis, but it never says that. Also, "rotational" can mean a lot. Given the confusion, I've come to believe that this is simply a poorly written manual, nothing else.

[mercer]

8 minutes ago, John Matthews said:

Just a couple of thoughts... IBIS is only taking out my micro-jitters for me and offering a "gentle floating" to the video. If I move too much, you can see it. I can't walk and film really. Focus is always going to be a challenge- the GX80 will NOT autofocus on a moving subject if the camera itself is moving, manual focus is the only way.

I agree that the marketing material is confusing and cagey at best. Nevermind the number of inquiries from us to know more about the HDMI port and codecs. They just don't answer. Nevertheless, I fully checked this out months ago before buying GX80. Andrew checked on this, along with countless reviewers to confirm 5-axis IBIS. My understanding of E-stabalization is that the camera takes a further crop, moving around the image on a X and Y axis on the sensor to further stabalize, meaning it's Hybrid 5-axis is 5-axis + extra stabalization (but it crops). Pitch and yaw would require sensor movements to compensate. I've never heard of software compensating for pitch and yaw.

However, where do you see that "Body IBIS" is only 3-axis? I only read "normal" IBIS is "Camera shake is corrected for up/down, left/right, and rotational movements." On the face of that phrase, it sounds like 3-axis, but it never says that. Also, "rotational" can mean a lot. Given the confusion, I've come to believe that this is simply a poorly written manual, nothing else.

Perhaps, but if "Normal" is 5-Axis, then I am not very pleased with it. I like the e-stabilizer, but does that in fact pose issues with artifacts? Hmm. I honestly bought the camera because of the 5-Axis IBIS, without the mic it still seemed to make sense. I think a lot of the videos, I have seen online that impressed me, the videographer was probably using e-stabilization.  

[jase]

Well, in the end it doesnt really matter whether anyone says that there is a decrease in quality if you dont notice / care, right? I am using the e-stabilizer and I am very pleased with the results, so why should i turn it off?

[mercer]

9 minutes ago, mercer said:

However, where do you see that "Body IBIS" is only 3-axis? I only read "normal" IBIS is "Camera shake is corrected for up/down, left/right, and rotational movements." On the face of that phrase, it sounds like 3-axis, but it never says that. Also, "rotational" can mean a lot. Given the confusion, I've come to believe that this is simply a poorly written manual, nothing else.

Yeah, I guess rotational could mean roll, pitch and yaw. But with the e-stabilizer definition, they explicitly state, "Jitter during motion picture recording is corrected along the vertical, horizontal, roll, pitch, and yaw axes by making use of the In-Lens Image Stabilizer, In-Body Image Stabilizer, and Electronic Image Stabilizer. (5-Axis Hybrid Image Stabilizer)"

It's obviously a poorly written manual, and if "normal" IBIS worked as well as e-stabilizer, I would chalk it up to that. But since it does not, that is why I am questioning it. Do you have an ois lens? I don't have one, but that would be the way to test it. If Dual IS works better than Normal, but the same as normal with e-stabilizer, then I would suspect that the normal ibis is not true 5-Axis. 

3 minutes ago, jase said:

Well, in the end it doesnt really matter whether anyone says that there is a decrease in quality if you dont notice / care, right? I am using the e-stabilizer and I am very pleased with the results, so why should i turn it off?

That was going to be my next comment. In the end it doesn't matter. As long as everybody is happy with their settings, then who really cares, I just wish Panasonic was a little more clear with their instructional and marketing materials.

[ninetto]

Quote

I am using the e-stabilizer and I am very pleased with the results, so why should i turn it off?

Well, as-they-say... "ignorance is bliss". If you are happy with what you have, stop reading here.

Curious about all the various theories, I just did an extreme quickie test, hand-holding both a Canon-FD 135mm, and then the Lumix 14-140 zoom at about 135mm,

With the E-stabilization on, there was a sudden glitch: when holding the camera very steady, propped on a window ledge, the e-stablization caused a kind of sudden delerium-tremors. Strangely enough, as long as there was some minimum panning, it was ok, but when the image was steadiest, the E-stabilization seemed to freak out. This did not happen when the E-stabilization was turned off.

Agreed, this is an extreme case: how often would you try to hand-hold 135mm, but there you have it. The potential for "artifacts" with the E-stabilzation are definitely there, where it was not a problem without e-stabilization.

I will try to post the quickie test tomorrow.

 

[mercer]

18 minutes ago, ninetto said:

Well, as-they-say... "ignorance is bliss". If you are happy with what you have, stop reading here.

Curious about all the various theories, I just did an extreme quickie test, hand-holding both a Canon-FD 135mm, and then the Lumix 14-140 zoom at about 135mm,

With the E-stabilization on, there was a sudden glitch: when holding the camera very steady, propped on a window ledge, the e-stablization caused a kind of sudden delerium-tremors. Strangely enough, as long as there was some minimum panning, it was ok, but when the image was steadiest, the E-stabilization seemed to freak out. This did not happen when the E-stabilization was turned off.

Agreed, this is an extreme case: how often would you try to hand-hold 135mm, but there you have it. The potential for "artifacts" with the E-stabilzation are definitely there, where it was not a problem without e-stabilization.

I will try to post the quickie test tomorrow.

Thanks for the test, but can you tell me how good the normal stabilizer worked compared to Dual-IS and how well the e-stabilizer on worked compared to Dual-IS? The glitch sounds like it occurred due to being propped on the window ledge. No IBIS should be used with a tripod or completely steady like that, it confuses the system. 

Pitch and Yaw would be the biggest question. 

[John Matthews]

8 hours ago, mercer said:

Thanks for the test, but can you tell me how good the normal stabilizer worked compared to Dual-IS and how well the e-stabilizer on worked compared to Dual-IS? The glitch sounds like it occurred due to being propped on the window ledge. No IBIS should be used with a tripod or completely steady like that, it confuses the system. 

Pitch and Yaw would be the biggest question. 

Actually, the GX80 is the first camera I've ever heard of that can its "normal" IBIS on, even when on a tripod. Reports and my experience suggest there no difference. Go figure.

[mercer]

53 minutes ago, John Matthews said:

Actually, the GX80 is the first camera I've ever heard of that can its "normal" IBIS on, even when on a tripod. Reports and my experience suggest there no difference. Go figure.

Did not know that, good to know. 

[Inazuma]

When using the kit lens  (which has OIS) I would sometimes get LOADS of jitter when holding the camera at certain angles whilst IBIS was on. Did anyone else have this problem?

[John Matthews]

1 hour ago, Inazuma said:

When using the kit lens  (which has OIS) I would sometimes get LOADS of jitter when holding the camera at certain angles whilst IBIS was on. Did anyone else have this problem?

My original comment was only concerning IBIS, not Dual IS. I would imagine Dual IS would be consistent with other cameras out there, meaning you get jitters... not a surprise. It would be interesting to see if OIS or IBIS is causing any jitters by turning off IBIS and leaving on OIS.

Here's Jack from Panasonic, talking about IBIS. (picked up from 43rumors this morning).

 

[ninetto]

OKAY, here is the quickie test, regarding e-stabilizer or no.

Agreed, this is insane to hand-hold 135mm with tele-converter ON (effective=270mm!), but I wanted to try to push the stabilizer to the max.

Result is really quite good, but the e-stabilizer caused "tremor-artifacts" as it freaked out in the 2nd take - I was holding the camera with elbow propped up on the window sill continuously and NO, this is not an earthquake region. So I will stick to advice previously given by Andrew and others; leave the e-stabiliser OFF!

 

[mercer]

14 hours ago, ninetto said:

OKAY, here is the quickie test, regarding e-stabilizer or no.

Agreed, this is insane to hand-hold 135mm with tele-converter ON (effective=270mm!), but I wanted to try to push the stabilizer to the max.

Result is really quite good, but the e-stabilizer caused "tremor-artifacts" as it freaked out in the 2nd take - I was holding the camera with elbow propped up on the window sill continuously and NO, this is not an earthquake region. So I will stick to advice previously given by Andrew and others; leave the e-stabiliser OFF!

 

Interesting test. Hmm. Not sure what to say. I have used the camera with the 5-Axis Hybrid IBIS for almost a month and never encountered that tremor issue, but I have never used it with an ois lens, only vintage manual lenses and I have never propped my elbows on anything while using it. Am not saying either of those things were the cause, just explaining my circumstances with it. 

[gethin]

On 06/09/2016 at 0:27 AM, fuzzynormal said:

Might be irrelevant, but:

1) You have to make sure your stabilizer is set for the proper focal length. 

and 

2) The stabilizer is actually working. I have 2 gx85's. On one of them the stabilizer has actually got "stuck" a few times. 

The description of your ibis performance does make it sound like it's not performing adequately; through user error or malfunction.

I'd also advise that your moire could well be a computer display issue rather than the actual footage. I just did a shoot with a lady in tight stripes. Morie looked pretty bad in the edit window, but when I watched the footage full-rez, it was fine.  

Re moire: 

 

This is 1080 50p. For most people this situation will arise infrequently. You're right that looking at the 4K version at 1:1 there was virtually none. 

[John Matthews]

40 minutes ago, gethin said:

This is 1080 50p. For most people this situation will arise infrequently. You're right that looking at the 4K version at 1:1 there was virtually none. 

Yeah, this isn't the type of moiré that the human eye will see. I think many 1080p cameras would have this happen in this situation. Go with the 4k and downscale. Another question would be was this a Panasonic lens? The tend to be auto corrected for moiré... I think Panasonic makes a point of not having any sort of correction on non-Panasonic lenses.

[wolf33d]

Gx80 is dead for video. The G7 replacement kills it (with 8bit 422 recordes internal my and better body ergo)

http://www.43rumors.com/ft4-first-info-g8x-camera/

not to mention the GH5 (expensive though)

[sanveer]

42 minutes ago, wolf33d said:

Gx80 is dead for video. The G7 replacement kills it (with 8bit 422 recordes internal my and better body ergo)

http://www.43rumors.com/ft4-first-info-g8x-camera/

not to mention the GH5 (expensive though)

I am not sure what Panasonic is upto.

It kills the GX7, GX8 and G7 with the GX85. And now they are rumours of the G80 that will have OBIS and 8-bit 4-2-2 INTERNAL. If it is true, it will make the GX85 redundant.

At this rate, in the end, Panasonic will kill all other lines, except the GH. 

Very inspiring. 

[John Matthews]

57 minutes ago, sanveer said:

I am not sure what Panasonic is upto.

It kills the GX7, GX8 and G7 with the GX85. And now they are rumours of the G80 that will have OBIS and 8-bit 4-2-2 INTERNAL. If it is true, it will make the GX85 redundant.

At this rate, in the end, Panasonic will kill all other lines, except the GH. 

Very inspiring. 

It's called capitalism, guys. In the end, they'll all be obsolete; yet, they'll still be able to make stories in 2500 (if humanity still exists). Happy thoughts.

1 hour ago, wolf33d said:

Gx80 is dead for video. The G7 replacement kills it (with 8bit 422 recordes internal my and better body ergo)

http://www.43rumors.com/ft4-first-info-g8x-camera/

not to mention the GH5 (expensive though)

The GX80/85 was never built with ergonomics as the priority... it's about size of the body, nothing else. Is the GX80/85 more in-line with what MFT is all about anyway or not? My guess it is because if you really want ergonomics, MFT is probably not the answer.

[IronFilm]

1 hour ago, sanveer said:

I am not sure what Panasonic is upto.

 

It is natural for technology to progress forward every year. 

[sanveer]

30 minutes ago, John Matthews said:

It's called capitalism, guys. In the end, they'll all be obsolete; yet, they'll still be able to make stories in 2500 (if humanity still exists). Happy thoughts.

Hahaha. It's true, though the time period for the newer models is too short.

 

26 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

It is natural for technology to progress forward every year. 

True. But they are making 6 month old models redundant. That is very curious.