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

[Fredrik Lyhne]

@sanveer The color is pretty close on the GH4 shot. The color is some sort of white but it's a tad warmer than clean white. It's shot with natural light in my living room and the wall is about 5 meters behind me. 

[John Matthews]

9 hours ago, sanveer said:

I was also surprised by how disappointed they seemed with the video on the GX85. Though I really liked the skin tones in their video. Also, while a mic-jack is desirable, not having it isn't the end of the world. Also, I noticed they forgot to mention the HDMI out along with monitoring in-camera, being one of the better features (like Andrew mentioned). 

Though, I feel Panasonic should go the Sony way and have Log profiles on all their cameras. Even if they are paid firmware updates. I feel Panasonic isn't extracting the maximum resolution possible from the sensor. 

Also, I feel Panasonic needs to work on their RAW photos. They need to move towards the 14-Bit RAW side. And, I have (only) a gut feeling, that it's the processing that's stopping them (and not the sensor). 

Not to descend into Jordan-bashing here, but think he might have forgotten why the channel became popular in the first place. He seems more concerned about his FS5 review, which I'm sure is really cool, but many of us will never really see. I think the best word to describe their review of the GX80/85 is "superficial" at best. I think they spent more time on scouting their location, learning about their location, running the FS5, and driving to the location than they did on learning more about the camera... possibly only reading confusing marketing literature from Panasonic. Sorry for the rant, but it seemed the only thing they had to say was: "It doesn't have a mic-input. It's got crappy sound." Meanwhile, they'll love the dual-pixel AF in the 80d- what a great cinematic tool that is! I'm not going to watch anymore review channels and I'm just going to do my best with the camera I've got now. Besides, I'm getting the impression most of the channels out there are primarily considering the clicks they can get from listing the "great" product in their "show notes below."

By the way, I specifically asked Jordan to look at the HDMI. He didn't. Doubt he ever read my question.

Log files sound great, but I think, from listening to many people on this site, they represent major challenges in post for the non-pro. Often, I look at the final product and simply can't help thinking: "why bother?" It looks almost the same. Sure, the highlights tend to blow out, just be more careful.

You mention 14-bit raw... that's cool, but if it screws up or slows anything else down, I'd rather not have it. For me, the problem of having a great camera for photography was solved about 5 years ago. With a GX80/85, you can have huge prints and have amazing latitude in post. Yes, even from 16 megapixels and "only" 12-bit files. If you print, I think most people would see little to no difference between the $3000 A7R ii and a GX80/85 on a A3-size print... possibly A2 or even A1, with viewing distance taken into consideration. For a major improvement in quality, consider medium format as everything else is simply a single-digit percentage point difference with current MFT offerings. Sure, there are aesthetic differences, but can you get shallow DOF with MFT? Of course, you can.

[sanveer]

12 hours ago, Fredrik Lyhne said:

@sanveer The color is pretty close on the GH4 shot. The color is some sort of white but it's a tad warmer than clean white. It's shot with natural light in my living room and the wall is about 5 meters behind me. 

@Fredrik, I didn't realise it's you in the video. The wall has some very strange colour. Als, the GH4 has a very strong orange tint. The GX85 also has a tint, but not sure what colour it is. If you have nay other camera (canon or nikon), maybe you could what colour they get the wall. It's like the dark horse for DSLR/ Mirrorless colour science. 

 

4 hours ago, John Matthews said:

Not to descend into Jordan-bashing here, but think he might have forgotten why the channel became popular in the first place. He seems more concerned about his FS5 review, which I'm sure is really cool, but many of us will never really see. I think the best word to describe their review of the GX80/85 is "superficial" at best. I think they spent more time on scouting their location, learning about their location, running the FS5, and driving to the location than they did on learning more about the camera... possibly only reading confusing marketing literature from Panasonic. Sorry for the rant, but it seemed the only thing they had to say was: "It doesn't have a mic-input. It's got crappy sound." Meanwhile, they'll love the dual-pixel AF in the 80d- what a great cinematic tool that is! I'm not going to watch anymore review channels and I'm just going to do my best with the camera I've got now. Besides, I'm getting the impression most of the channels out there are primarily considering the clicks they can get from listing the "great" product in their "show notes below."

By the way, I specifically asked Jordan to look at the HDMI. He didn't. Doubt he ever read my question.

Log files sound great, but I think, from listening to many people on this site, they represent major challenges in post for the non-pro. Often, I look at the final product and simply can't help thinking: "why bother?" It looks almost the same. Sure, the highlights tend to blow out, just be more careful.

You mention 14-bit raw... that's cool, but if it screws up or slows anything else down, I'd rather not have it. For me, the problem of having a great camera for photography was solved about 5 years ago. With a GX80/85, you can have huge prints and have amazing latitude in post. Yes, even from 16 megapixels and "only" 12-bit files. If you print, I think most people would see little to no difference between the $3000 A7R ii and a GX80/85 on a A3-size print... possibly A2 or even A1, with viewing distance taken into consideration. For a major improvement in quality, consider medium format as everything else is simply a single-digit percentage point difference with current MFT offerings. Sure, there are aesthetic differences, but can you get shallow DOF with MFT? Of course, you can.

Panasonic increased the contact points on their hotshoe, which I am guessing could be used for audio too (if the software and hardware allow it). I also realised, that if Andrew (Reid) says that he gets an audio signal via the HDMI port, through the HDMI out, along with video (like on the G7, though along with monitoring in-camera), then there may be a way to (possibly) work around that too. Though, not sure the audio and video signals could be split.

 

[jonpais]

@John Matthews While I agree that TCSTV may have been a bit dismissive in their review of the GX/85, it might be hasty to conclude that their test was superficial. I did feel, however, that saying the camera is obviously for amateurs who don't know their way around an NLE was a bit off: for sure the GH5 will have the very same ability to do 20- and 40-second pans and zooms of 4K clips in-camera. But apart from the lack of a microphone and headphone jack, the lack of weather sealing, a flat profile like V log Lite and a swivel LCD screen, I believe the GX85 battery is also lower capacity, and that is one of the things I cherish most about my GH4. And while I personally could care less about the absence of a microphone input and headphone jack, what TCSTV has to say about their usefulness for vloggers can't be denied. The built-in microphone did sound atrocious in their test: so much so, that it would be all but unusable in a situation where you had to grab and shoot on the fly. If I were a vlogger, I'd probably regret the lack of a swivel screen as well. Finally, I think TCSTV was also spot-on regarding the unexciting minimalist approach to the design of the camera. Concerning the design, I really hope that when Panasonic does release the GH5, they do away with the annoying, microsopic, mushy-feeling buttons.

[John Matthews]

6 hours ago, sanveer said:

Panasonic increased the contact points on their hotshoe, which I am guessing could be used for audio too (if the software and hardware allow it). I also realised, that if Andrew (Reid) says that he gets an audio signal via the HDMI port, through the HDMI out, along with video (like on the G7, though along with monitoring in-camera), then there may be a way to (possibly) work around that too. Though, not sure the audio and video signals could be split.

I didn't know about the extra pin. That's interesting though. Maybe some accessories are coming in the future? I guess if there's some sort of mic that can pass through the hotshoe, it would give it much better onboard audio. I would like to note that I did try simply putting a Zoom H1, needless to say, I could still hear the IBIS. Moving the setup off camera (closer to the subject) yielded great results though.

[Ajerap]

Hi there.

I was going to buy a second lumix g7 today (get already one and really like it) as a second body for filming. 

But i just came there and read this subject about the new gx85, so no i m hesitate.

I use mostly the sigma 18-35, so is there a huge improvement with 5 axis stab ?

There is no cine like D or v Profil do you think its gonna be hard to match video color ? Any good tips with it?

For same price range which one will you buy ? gx85 ou g7.

Thnx

 

[John Matthews]

1 hour ago, jonpais said:

@John Matthews While I agree that TCSTV may have been a bit dismissive in their review of the GX/85, it might be hasty to conclude that their test was superficial. I did feel, however, that saying the camera is obviously for amateurs who don't know their way around an NLE was a bit off: for sure the GH5 will have the very same ability to do 20- and 40-second pans and zooms of 4K clips in-camera. But apart from the lack of a microphone and headphone jack, the lack of weather sealing, a flat profile like V log Lite and a swivel LCD screen, I believe the GX85 battery is also lower capacity, and that is one of the things I cherish most about my GH4. And while I personally could care less about the absence of a microphone input and headphone jack, what TCSTV has to say about their usefulness for vloggers can't be denied. The built-in microphone did sound atrocious in their test: so much so, that it would be all but unusable in a situation where you had to grab and shoot on the fly. If I were a vlogger, I'd probably regret the lack of a swivel screen as well. Finally, I think TCSTV was also spot-on regarding the unexciting minimalist approach to the design of the camera. Concerning the design, I really hope that when Panasonic does release the GH5, they do away with the annoying, microsopic, mushy-feeling buttons.

I guess my main point is that they seem inconsistent in their review comparing it to other cameras out there- a double standard. Apparently, Panasonic needs not only to give excellent features like zebras, 5 axis IBIS, reliability, no overheating, no max filming limits, a GH5 sensor (because it's the same), a smaller form-factor better suited for MFT, an excellent 4k image, a great touch interface, peaking, a large, sharp image for manual focus, and many more video related features that other manufacturers can't seem to offer, but also all the features of a higher priced GH5 (like the ones you mentioned above). In fact, the features you mentioned like bigger battery and a swivel screen might require a bigger body. I think its unreasonable to expect a sub-$1000 dollar camera to do everything perfectly- just because it's Panasonic. Meanwhile, other manufacturers get a free pass for not having 4k (and many of the other features I mentioned above). Concerning the handling of the camera, it's much better than one might think: notably, the fact you can easily change ALL aspects of your shot with it up next to your eye- something that the Fuji and Sony cannot do (not sure about the Olympus they talked about). The A6300 doesn't even have two dials on it and it's much more expensive. Finally, the one thing that I simply love about this camera is its minimalistic nature- why should a camera be a fashion statement? It's a tool that you WANT to disappear. Anyway, I conclude by saying I think they didn't do their homework and they got some stuff simply wrong in the review and didn't really promote some of the features that are rather unique at the price point.

[fuzzynormal]

33 minutes ago, John Matthews said:

 I did try simply putting a Zoom H1, needless to say, I could still hear the IBIS. Moving the setup off camera (closer to the subject) yielded great results though.

You tried to use a H1 as a mic to record audio while it was on the camera?  For example, you filmed someone talking from 10 feet across the room and the H1 mic was on the GX85?

FWIW, it almost always worthless to record audio from the camera.  It's almost irrelevant how high-fidelity and professional a microphone would be.  If a mic is not placed in the right spot, pointed the right direction, it'll just sound lousy.

[7 Lakes]

On May 28, 2016 at 11:43 AM, John Matthews said:

https://www.digit-photo.com/Appareils-photo-hybrides-numeriques-aFA0090/PANASONIC-Lumix-DMC-GX80-Boitier-Nu-Silver-rPANADMCGX80EFS.html

Thanks, John. My Lumix GX80 arrived today! Wow, there is a lot to learn inside at first... Will post my impressions and a new music video in a week.

[John Matthews]

4 minutes ago, fuzzynormal said:

You tried to use a H1 as a mic to record audio while it was on the camera?  For example, you filmed someone talking from 10 feet across the room and the H1 mic was on the GX85?

FWIW, it almost always worthless to record audio from the camera.  It's almost irrelevant how high-fidelity and professional a microphone would be.  If a mic is not placed in the right spot, pointed the right direction, it'll just sound lousy.

Just an experiment. I filmed my 4-year old daughter on a head-shot. I wanted to see if the IBIS would still be picked up with the Zoom. I realise placing the mic close to the subject is ideal. I learned that one 8 years ago when I first started.  

[fuzzynormal]

6 minutes ago, John Matthews said:

I learned that one 8 years ago when I first started.  

Don't we all ;-)

[Inazuma]

Footage with the default settings on this camera looks great, if a little clinical. 

I have been toying around with the settings whilst comparing it to the nikon d5500. It seems to me that the best way to get a slightly more filmic and nicer look is to use the following:

Natural 0 / -5 / -5 / -2 (cont, sharp, nr, sat). -2 highlights. No iDynamic. And whitebalance adjustment set to A3 G3.

With this setting, greenery looks less digital green and has more of a warm tint to it like film. And skin tones veer less towards the red and again has a warmer appearance (without looking yellowy like with GH4 stuff). 

 

[John Matthews]

22 minutes ago, Inazuma said:

 

Footage with the default settings on this camera looks great, if a little clinical. 

 

I'd say yes as long as you put NR and sharpness at -5. Otherwise, it looks like a bad 1080p image blown up to 4k. I know that iDynamic on many of the Panasonic camera didn't yield great results, but have you actually tried it on the GX80?

[7 Lakes]

37 minutes ago, Inazuma said:

I have been toying around with the settings whilst comparing it to the nikon d5500.

What could you say after comparing it to the Nikon D5500?

I attached F-mount Sigma 18-35 f1.8 to Lumix GX80 through the simple Fotga adapter. And how can I change the Aperture in camera now?

Thank you.

[John Matthews]

6 minutes ago, 7 Lakes said:

What could you say after comparing it to the Nikon D5500?

I attached F-mount Sigma 18-35 f1.8 to Lumix GX80 through the simple Fotga adapter. And how can I change the Aperture in camera now?

Thank you.

Pretty sure you can't. For that setup, I think you need an adapter with electrical contacts or with aperture built into the adapter...

[7 Lakes]

31 minutes ago, John Matthews said:

I think you need an adapter with electrical contacts or with aperture built into the adapter

Metabones? Are there any other alternatives for F-mount Sigma 18-35 f1.8 to the Lumix GX80?

[John Matthews]

1 minute ago, 7 Lakes said:

Metabones? Are there any other alternatives?

I think Fotodiox makes one... not sure if its any good. Maybe someone has experience with it. Also, do you want the IBIS to work with it? If so, it would need to communicate it to the camera...

[Inazuma]

1 hour ago, John Matthews said:

I know that iDynamic on many of the Panasonic camera didn't yield great results, but have you actually tried it on the GX80?

Actually for a long time after I got my GX7 I was an advocate of using iDynamic. In fact even now I wouldn't say "dont use it". But just be aware of what it does. It raises shadows and midtones in a different way than if you were to use the shadow curve or adjust the contrast slider. The end result is that the contrast in your image can look a little "washed out". It's hard to explain..  but for example if your subject is a person, then their skin wont have the same range of tonality, even after grading. This could be desirable if going for more of a low-fi look.

46 minutes ago, 7 Lakes said:

What could you say after comparing it to the Nikon D5500?

There is no definitive. Sometimes the Nikon looks better, sometimes the Panasonic does. But the Panasonic is far more usable as a camera.

14 minutes ago, 7 Lakes said:

Metabones? Are there any other alternatives for F-mount Sigma 18-35 f1.8 to the Lumix GX80?

Nikon mount lenses have a physical lever on the rear mount which controls the aperture directly. There are adapters you can buy which have a ring around them that controls this lever. I'm talking about electronic Nikon lenses btw, not the old manual aperture ones. The one I use is the Metabones, but there are cheaper alternatives too.

[DevonChris]

1 hour ago, John Matthews said:

I'd say yes as long as you put NR and sharpness at -5. Otherwise, it looks like a bad 1080p image blown up to 4k. I know that iDynamic on many of the Panasonic camera didn't yield great results, but have you actually tried it on the GX80?

I think the sharpness setting should depend on the lens.

If you are using a Panny lens then I agree with the -5 setting, however if you are using a vintage lens which does not have that digital sharpening - Ai-S for example, then I think you should use a setting closer to 0.

[7 Lakes]

45 minutes ago, Inazuma said:

Sometimes the Nikon looks better, sometimes the Panasonic does.

I guess Nikon's Flat profile should have more freedom to grade, is it right? And probably D5500 is better in low light with less visible noise?