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

[markr041]

1 minute ago, Buckster said:

thanks very much markr041 - will try that

btw - surprised how many negative comments in review below on video quality of the GX85 - especially DR wise - I'm genuinely surprised

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6GnkQo2clM

 

 

What he says in that video and what his video shows are completely the opposite. As many commenters on that video said, the GX85 shots looked much better than the Sony ones.

[PannySVHS]

I think, Panasonic really has some mojo going.

It is all about the settings and the grading. Besides WB, light, setting of course:). I still like some of the GX7´s footage on vimeo the best of all Panny cams.

Maybe it is the GX7 shooters, maybe the absence of adventerous usage of luts, I don´t know.

Came across this video below, seemingly shot in 50p. Still looks filmic in a way the beautiful motion picture Bin Jip does.

Some beautiful tones and hues going on. If people referred to Japanese preference for greenish tones- this is what I would

assume to have been meant. Not 8bit SLOG graded greens of Sony color horrors!:)

 

Out of box a lot of footage looks like a drawing done with crayons. With a certain way of color treatment it can look like

a oil painting with a richness to it. Some "hidden" magic in those Pannys. Now, maybe the examples colors below doesn´t fit

the bill for some readers but to me it is a beautiful illustration of the Panny mojo.

To me even more so than the cool GX7 beach footage with the Ultra Contrast filters, which has been posted on this

beautiful forum some longer time ago.

 

 

[Vesku]

On 7/29/2016 at 0:31 AM, markr041 said:

Here is what Standard default looks like on a sunny day (NR -2):

To me, that's what I saw, and what I wanted to convey.

If you want something unrealistic with a "look" then you may want to use Natural as a base. But it is not at all clear whether you should also drastically reduce contrast, saturation and sharpness in the camera when you shoot, since altering those in post forces you do it on a highly compressed, 4:2:0 8-bit video. Camera settings, however, are invoked prior to compression.

I think you should get the look you want in the camera (whatever that is), but others seem to want to do more in post based on severely altered from normal settings in the camera. Why not try to get the camera to produce the look you want (there are lots of controls), and then tweak in post from there, rather than trying to get a "blank slate" out of the camera that needs a lot of work in post? No flat setting really mimics RAW video. In any case I am not advocating your videos should look like the one I posted; it is just an example of what one setting produces.

In my monitors your video is quite dark. Did you underexposed? I cant believe that your eyes see the scene like this. In my opinion the Standard contrast 0 has too dark blacks. I use Natural and always contrast -5 + iDynamic low when the sun is shining. I think the Natural could see the shadows under the bridge in your video. The natural contrast -5 is sometimes a bit weak in midtones but it is easy to fix using gamma in player or editor.

 

 

[Nathan]

On 29/07/2016 at 6:56 PM, Michael Coffee said:

Personal View has a good reputation for their deals. Vitaly, who runs the site, is the guy that originally hacked the GH1/GH2 Panasonics..

Thanks Michael. I think I'll go for it

[sanveer]

I saw this yesterday, and I was blown away. The Difference is almost Night and Day. 
 

 

[Buckster]

just got a Gitup 2 to go with my GX80 for underwater shots etc

on initial tests the audio sounds better than on my GX80 ! further testing required

[IronFilm]

On 6/1/2016 at 9:49 AM, Paul H. Ryu said:

I've never posted on this forum before but I read it quite often, and I thought I should finally contribute since I have actual useful content this time that nobody's actually definitively confirmed. I have the Panasonic GX85, the US version. I have it in my hands and it's a beauty. But let's just get straight to the point.

1. In AVCHD and in 4K, there is no 29 minute recording time limit. There still is a weird 29 minute (and 4GB) limit for FHD/HD/VGA MP4 clips, but none for AVCHD and 4K MP4. Part of me didn't actually believe it, so I took a fresh battery, a fresh 64 GB card, put the camera into 4K video mode, IBIS on, and just hit record. 1 hr 29 min 9 sec later, the card filled up, and the camera stopped recording, but the battery still had one bar left, and the camera never quit recording on me. It was warm, but not hot to the touch. It was indoors and at night, however, but I'm just telling you, recording long clips is well within the realms of possibility with this camera. I'm actually quite excited about being able to record indefinitely in AVCHD as well. When I'm recording a long event, it's not that important to get the best quality, but it's important to be able to get SOMETHING. I can run this camera up on a tripod, set it to AFC mode at 1080/30p 24Mbps AVCHD, hit record, and come back some time later and know that it got SOMETHING for last hour and a half. AVCHD can be annoying to work with, but a lot of consumer-level camcorders still use the format, so in effect, I'm getting a very capable large sensor camcorder to go along with my high-end 4K shooter. No complaints at all.

2. And that's not all, folks. I've had a GH4 and one of my least favorite things about filming 4K in the GH4 (and GX8 and G7) is that stupid 4 GB file size limit thing. So when you're shooting 4K, every six and a half minutes, there's a new 4GB file. But that's history now. On the GX85, if you use an SDXC card (basically anything bigger than 32 GB), the camera will give you one single monolithic file. I record a lot of musical performances, so long takes are kind of standard in my regular usage. I am not joking when I say that my editing process for 4K just became 40% happier. According to the manual, a file will split if "the continuous recording time exceeds 3 hours and 4 minutes or if the file exceeds 96 GB." Since the battery can't even last that long, for all intents and purposes, GX85 will give you single takes in single files.

I expected the IBIS and the 4K and the beautiful design and all the other stuff. But I honestly didn't expect these two features. I really thought they were going to burden us with a stupid 29 minute limit in all settings (I assumed that and ranted about in other forums, I feel dumb now, oops) and never in my wildest dreams did I actually think they'd solve the 4GB issue with this camera, but they did.

It's safe to say, this is the best MFT mirrorless shooter right now. GH4, you had a good run, but GX85 is the king. This is a true hybrid shooter. And at about half the price as a GH4 when you consider the cute pancake zoom has decent resale value.

As an aside, GX8 buyers have got to feel a little burned by the GX85. I'm sure a lot of them would love large file support and 5-axis IBIS.

This. Is. Awesome.

[Cinegain]

On 2-8-2016 at 7:38 PM, Nathan said:

Thanks Michael. I think I'll go for it

Maybe you don't have to... 'Setting Panasonic camera in system mode - PAL to NTSC, 25p to 30p, no 30 min. limit'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dt-GX5BdcgU

As seen on:

Otherwise I know Vitaliy is good for it. Have done some deals there myself. I would recommmend http://www.onestop-digital.com/index.php of which I heard great things, just they don't seem to carry that model right now. They have a good import tax policy for some European countries. Google Shopping mentiones eglobalcentral . They're a little vague on how they ship 'em to ya. If it would come out of Hong Kong, or from Europe. They do say in the conditions that their price policy holds no surprises and is free of customs duties once delivered. So there's that.

Great stuff in this topic while I was gone for a bit. Jan, great stuff man!

[jonpais]

The much longer battery life, microphone and headphone jack and swivel LCD screen on the GH4 are more important to me, since I don't shoot 30 minute clips. Also, the GH4 takes a 1:1 crop of the sensor when shooting 4K, while the GX80 crops in slightly more, increasing the likelihood of aliasing and moire. I will wait for the GH5. Until it arrives, I'm using a pistol grip stabilizer for most of my shots now.

[Cinegain]

Yeah, the GH4 is definitly more production friendly. But the GX80 is just so sexy. I can pop up a compact prime, be it that 20mm pancake, Mitakon 25mm f/0.95 or a boosted Contax Zeiss and you can have a really low profile set-up for some run-n-gun handheld shooting. You can squeeze a bit more out of the sensor performance wise and it's all stabilized. I wouldn't say: 'get rid of your GH4 now, it's obsolete, all hail the almighty GX80!', since the GH4 is still the productivity master that offers up more functionality. But the GX80 does make a pretty mean addition to get some cool shots into your projects as it's just so convenient and well performing. Hopefully, indeed, the GH5 combines best of both and then some!

[jonpais]

On July 29, 2016 at 4:31 AM, markr041 said:

Here is what Standard default looks like on a sunny day (NR -2):

To me, that's what I saw, and what I wanted to convey.

If you want something unrealistic with a "look" then you may want to use Natural as a base. But it is not at all clear whether you should also drastically reduce contrast, saturation and sharpness in the camera when you shoot, since altering those in post forces you do it on a highly compressed, 4:2:0 8-bit video. Camera settings, however, are invoked prior to compression.

I think you should get the look you want in the camera (whatever that is), but others seem to want to do more in post based on severely altered from normal settings in the camera. Why not try to get the camera to produce the look you want (there are lots of controls), and then tweak in post from there, rather than trying to get a "blank slate" out of the camera that needs a lot of work in post? No flat setting really mimics RAW video. In any case I am not advocating your videos should look like the one I posted; it is just an example of what one setting produces.

But... I don't think you can get a look shooting Standard. If you want a look, you need to do some color grading. Anyhow, I often don't know exactly what type of palette I want until I've finished shooting and looking at them on the computer. In my case, I'll sometimes shoot a subject over a period of weeks or even months, and then decide what mood I want not go for. So shooting Natural gives me greater flexibility. I've read over and over again that 4:2:0 8-bit is limiting, but I've seen so many hundreds or thousands of videos that prove that in skilled hands, that is not the case at all. 

[sanveer]

27 minutes ago, Cinegain said:

Maybe you don't have to... 'Setting Panasonic camera in system mode - PAL to NTSC, 25p to 30p, no 30 min. limit'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dt-GX5BdcgU

As seen on:

Otherwise I know Vitaliy is good for it. Have done some deals there myself. I would recommmend http://www.onestop-digital.com/index.php of which I heard great things, just they don't seem to carry that model right now. They have a good import tax policy for some European countries. Google Shopping mentiones eglobalcentral . They're a little vague on how they ship 'em to ya. If it would come out of Hong Kong, or from Europe. They do say in the conditions that their price policy holds no surprises and is free of customs duties once delivered. So there's that.

Great stuff in this topic while I was gone for a bit. Jan, great stuff man!

I was curious to ask.
1. Has someone tried it on the GX80?
2. Does it also get rid of that freakin 30 mins record time limit?

[jonpais]

6 minutes ago, Cinegain said:

Yeah, the GH4 is definitly more production friendly. But the GX80 is just so sexy. I can pop up a compact prime, be it that 20mm pancake, Mitakon 25mm f/0.95 or a boosted Contax Zeiss and you can have a really low profile set-up for some run-n-gun handheld shooting. You can squeeze a bit more out of the sensor performance wise and it's all stabilized. I wouldn't say: 'get rid of your GH4 now, it's obsolete, all hail the almighty GX80!', since the GH4 is still the productivity master that offers up more functionality. But the GX80 does make a pretty mean addition to get some cool shots into your projects as it's just so convenient and well performing. Hopefully, indeed, the GH5 combines best of both and then some!

I agree it's kinda sexy . I was hoping the sleeker rangefinder profile you're talking about would translate into significant weight reduction, allowing me to shoot with Sigma glass and a Speed Booster, but it's still too heavy for my gimbal. 

[Cinegain]

9 minutes ago, sanveer said:

I was curious to ask.
1. Has someone tried it on the GX80?
2. Does it also get rid of that freakin 30 mins record time limit?

According several comments it works, but it seems there's a slight difference in buttons to press. That might make it a little trickier to get back from system default NTSC to PAL. So I've been hesitant to try it out myself.

5 minutes ago, jonpais said:

I agree it's kinda sexy . I was hoping the sleeker rangefinder profile you're talking about would translate into significant weight reduction, allowing me to shoot with Sigma glass and a Speed Booster, but it's still too heavy for my gimbal. 

That would be hard to balance I think anyways, since the 18-35mm f/1.8 makes the whole thing really front heavy. Not a lot of gimbals cope well with any combo and the 18-35mm, even if you'd use the Z Camera E1. Of which I btw still have to watch yesterday's video from Devin. Might do that right now, curious about his thoughts on it.

 

[markr041]

Everything is a "look," including Standard. The camera (or attached monitor) shows you exactly what the scene interpreted by it "looks" like. The point is not that Standard is the "look" you want, only that you can get a "look" out of the camera. There are lots of profiles and tweaks of profiles, and even curves, in the camera. All of which gets you different looks without the downside of artifacts from pushing around highly compressed 4:2:0 8-bit video. Tweaking in post from something the camera produces that is close to the look you want is the point, not no post. But also not such a flat profile that all the "look" comes from radical post manipulation.

29 minutes ago, jonpais said:

The much longer battery life, microphone and headphone jack and swivel LCD screen on the GH4 are more important to me, since I don't shoot 30 minute clips. Also, the GH4 takes a 1:1 crop of the sensor when shooting 4K, while the GX80 crops in slightly more, increasing the likelihood of aliasing and moire. I will wait for the GH5. Until it arrives, I'm using a pistol grip stabilizer for most of my shots now.

The GX80 crops in less, not more (the crop factor is less). Tests at 4K show no more artifacts from the GX80 than from the GH4 (despite the lack of anti-aliasing filter on the former, which is what helps resolution), and indeed higher resolution and much better low-light performance from the GX80. The picture is simply better. But, sure, the GH5 will likely have no worse picture than the GX80 and provide more flexibility in some way. But you may have to wait 4 months to get it, even if it is "announced" at Photokina.

[jonpais]

14 hours ago, markr041 said:

Everything is a "look," including Standard. The camera (or attached monitor) shows you exactly what the scene interpreted by it "looks" like. The point is not that Standard is the "look" you want, only that you can get a "look" out of the camera. There are lots of profiles and tweaks of profiles, and even curves, in the camera. All of which gets you different looks without the downside of artifacts from pushing around highly compressed 4:2:0 8-bit video. Tweaking in post from something the camera produces that is close to the look you want is the point, not no post. But also not such a flat profile that all the "look" comes from radical post manipulation.

I'm not talking about anything 'radical': if you could get the look you wanted in-camera, be it an Alexis or a lowly GH4, Resolve and all the other NLEs would be out of business, as well as FilmConvert and other plug-ins. Professional colorists would be out of work. I'm not seeing all the ugly artifacts you talk about in the many outstanding examples of footage shot with the GH4 with FilmConvert and other LUTs applied.

Apologies for derailing the topic. Let's get back to discussing the GX80!

[sanveer]

7 minutes ago, jonpais said:

I'm not talking about anything 'radical': if you could get the look you wanted in-camera, be it an Alexis or a lowly GH4, Resolve and all the other NLEs would be out of business. as would FilmConvert and other plug-ins. I'm not seeing all the ugly artifacts you talk about in the many outstanding examples of footage shot with the GH4 with FilmConvert and other LUTs applied.

I noticed that too. Until the GH4, Panasonic had a lot of fixed pattern noise in almost all videos. And, at higher ISO it almost completely collapses.

I see very little of that Fixed Pattern Noise in the GX80/85/ 7ii and G7 as well. 

[Cinegain]

@ markr041 Once it's crushed it's gone. A parachute has a reserve chute to deploy. You don't get it right the first time? Don't worry, there's wiggle room. Also, you might not have decided a look. Maybe afterwards you feel a certain look fits the piece much better. Once it's baked-in, it's done. But if you shoot with a bit more lattitude, you can flip it how you want. It's a philosophy thing. Same with photography. Some people think it's cheating if you use Lightroom/Photoshop and you should just shoot the picture in-camera. Well. To each their own. I think it's marvelous that we can shoot RAW pictures and develop them on the computer. And sure you can make additional adjustments to make it prettier. Girls put on many layers in front of the mirror each morning... some more than others. Who am I to say they can or can't. In the end you get a unique look from a unique point of view/perspective and to me that is what it is all about. Not all art is equal. But personally I like the approach to create part of the look in post, which ultimately gives you more creative freedom. But if you're of the mindset that creative freedom is the freedom not having to worry about the look in post and focusing on the moment itself (although I would argue that's exclusive to shooting as-is)... that's cool too.

Btw, I'm with Vesku!

On 1-8-2016 at 8:48 AM, Vesku said:

In my monitors your video is quite dark. Did you underexposed? I cant believe that your eyes see the scene like this. In my opinion the Standard contrast 0 has too dark blacks. I use Natural and always contrast -5 + iDynamic low when the sun is shining. I think the Natural could see the shadows under the bridge in your video. The natural contrast -5 is sometimes a bit weak in midtones but it is easy to fix using gamma in player or editor.

 

11 minutes ago, sanveer said:

I noticed that too. Until the GH4, Panasonic had a lot of fixed pattern noise in almost all videos. And, at higher ISO it almost completely collapses.

I see very little of that Fixed Pattern Noise in the GX80/85/ 7ii and G7 as well. 

Let's do a blast of the past!

I love that piece.

[jonpais]

16 minutes ago, sanveer said:

I noticed that too. Until the GH4, Panasonic had a lot of fixed pattern noise in almost all videos. And, at higher ISO it almost completely collapses.

I see very little of that Fixed Pattern Noise in the GX80/85/ 7ii and G7 as well. 

I won't shoot my GH4 beyond ISO 800 because of noise (actually, I seldom shoot above ISO 400), but I'm not still not convinced that the GX80 performs significantly better in low light. 

[sanveer]

14 minutes ago, Cinegain said:

@ markr041 Once it's crushed it's gone. A parachute has a reserve chute to deploy. You don't get it right the first time? Don't worry, there's wiggle room. Also, you might not have decided a look. Maybe afterwards you feel a certain look fits the piece much better. Once it's baked-in, it's done. But if you shoot with a bit more lattitude, you can flip it how you want. It's a philosophy thing. Same with photography. Some people think it's cheating if you use Lightroom/Photoshop and you should just shoot the picture in-camera. Well. To each their own. I think it's marvelous that we can shoot RAW pictures and develop them on the computer. And sure you can make additional adjustments to make it prettier. Girls put on many layers in front of the mirror each morning... some more than others. Who am I to say they can or can't. In the end you get a unique look from a unique point of view/perspective and to me that is what it is all about. Not all art is equal. But personally I like the approach to create part of the look in post, which ultimately gives you more creative freedom. But if you're of the mindset that creative freedom is the freedom not having to worry about the look in post and focusing on the moment itself (although I would argue that's exclusive to shooting as-is)... that's cool too.

Btw, I'm with Vesku!

 

Let's do a blast of the past!

I love that piece.

That video is shot really well, but it has the FPN that I just mentioned. In almost every frame.