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

[John Matthews]

11 minutes ago, Vesku said:

Idynamic high is too extreme. I use normally low and standard for extreme scenes, not high.

I think my GH4 records little more dynamic range and color information than GX85. Does the GX85 has 0-255 luminance range?

It's 8bit 4:2:0. The previous remarks were concerning iDynamic high... I haven't tested low or standard. Again, I have my doubts about any difference in DR other than superficial slight modification of processing curves resulting in more noise and artifacts in dark areas. What does @Andrew Reid say, if anything, in his GH4 guide? DPreview did mention a slight gain in DR at the lower end and a generally lower midpoint in their LX100 review. This is probably what you're noticing. I have my doubts that Panasonic has changed anything concerning iDynamic since the GH4, LX100, G7, and probably the G80/85.

[Vesku]

Idynamic underexposes 1/3 stop. Sensor gets less light. It is noisier than without it. It gets more stuff in highlights and lifts shadows. In iso 200 image is flatter and still clean. Here is what iDynamic high makes in iso200 when using JPG photos with GH4. I made a very heavy midtone curve to lighten images. 

4k video behaves quite the same as JPG photos with center crop.

[John Matthews]

31 minutes ago, Vesku said:

Idynamic underexposes 1/3 stop. Sensor gets less light. It is noisier than without it. It gets more stuff in highlights and lifts shadows. In iso 200 image is flatter and still clean. Here is what iDynamic high makes in iso200 when using JPG photos with GH4. I made a very heavy midtone curve to lighten images. 

4k video behaves quite the same as JPG photos with center crop.

Exactly where do you see more DR (which seems like the purpose of a flat profile)? Highlight spectacles on the car? More detail under the car? More detail in the grass?

If you're shooting the GH4, why don't you get a proper flat profile like V-log?

[mercer]

I was messing around with some B&W yesterday using the L-Monochrome profile. 

 

[Fredrik Lyhne]

17 minutes ago, mercer said:

I was messing around with some B&W yesterday using the L-Monochrome profile.

Looks nice! I've been meaning to test that profile too, but haven't gotten around to it yet. 

[mercer]

26 minutes ago, Fredrik Lyhne said:

Looks nice! I've been meaning to test that profile too, but haven't gotten around to it yet. 

Thanks, I really like the L-Monochrome profile. I used it with everything dialed down and the orange filter. I underexposed most of the shots by about a stop, which was probably a mistake, but it turned out okay. More tests. 

[Vesku]

2 hours ago, John Matthews said:

Exactly where do you see more DR (which seems like the purpose of a flat profile)? Highlight spectacles on the car? More detail under the car? More detail in the grass?

If you're shooting the GH4, why don't you get a proper flat profile like V-log?

This example is not for dynamic range. The scene has no extreme contrast. I wanted to show that iDynamic high is not making much more noise or other bad things at iso200.

(Still if you measure light and dark tones the iDynamic version is flatter)

As I have said I use iDynamic for getting flatter or lighter blacks from camera unedited. V-log has issues and it needs editing.

[Vesku]

I started to wonder the idynamic and I made some tests again. Idynamic adds noise to darks and should be used with care. It is best when wanting the lighter result unedited.

[Fredrik Lyhne]

Here's a new video i shot with the GX85 and 12-35mm X. Skin tones look pretty good I think. 

 

[jase]

1 hour ago, Fredrik Lyhne said:

Here's a new video i shot with the GX85 and 12-35mm X. Skin tones look pretty good I think. 

Ah, now I also want this lens. Where the first few frames an actual focus pull or was it a dissolve effect of your editing software? If the former, boy this is quite a constant focus pull with a fly by wire lens... fingers crossed.

[Fredrik Lyhne]

2 minutes ago, jase said:

Ah, now I also want this lens. Where the first few frames an actual focus pull or was it a dissolve effect of your editing software? If the former, boy this is quite a constant focus pull with a fly by wire lens... fingers crossed.

Sorry, it's a gaussian blur effect in FCPX. The lens is great if you have enough light. I ended up using the 15mm f/1.7  and 25mm in the next video because I think this video a little dark, and that looked a lot better. 

[jase]

9 minutes ago, Fredrik Lyhne said:

Sorry, it's a gaussian blur effect in FCPX. The lens is great if you have enough light. I ended up using the 15mm f/1.7  and 25mm in the next video because I think this video a little dark, and that looked a lot better. 

Too bad, I was afraid of that. How is manual focussing anyway with that lens? Dual IS is tempting...

[Fredrik Lyhne]

3 minutes ago, jase said:

Too bad, I was afraid of that. How is manual focussing anyway with that lens? Dual IS is tempting...

I just did a quick comparison with the 20mm and it's similar. Obviously it's bigger so it's easier to hold and the focus ring is also larger and wider. 

[jase]

1 hour ago, Fredrik Lyhne said:

I just did a quick comparison with the 20mm and it's similar. Obviously it's bigger so it's easier to hold and the focus ring is also larger and wider. 

And i assume the faster you turn the ring, the faster focus changes? Because weird enough, on my 20mm this is not the case.. no matter how fast I turn it, the focus isnt changed any faster.

[Fredrik Lyhne]

17 minutes ago, jase said:

And i assume the faster you turn the ring, the faster focus changes? Because weird enough, on my 20mm this is not the case.. no matter how fast I turn it, the focus isnt changed any faster.

Yes, I would say so but didn't really notice a difference between the two. I rarely focus on the fly, I usually set it before I record and just leave it.

Maybe someone else who has the 12-35mm X can comment on the manual focus abilities?

[Jimbo]

I owned the 12-35mm, great lens. The focus ring itself is nice enough, but I found it very difficult to consistently focus pull. Unfortunately it does have that annoying acceleration.

For comparison, I find the Leica 15mm much better for focus pulling. Although narrow, it's a nicer ring, has smoother action and has no acceleration.

I sold my 12-35 (for financial reasons, optically it's superb!) and then some months later I bought the Oly 12-40mm. Optically both zooms are amazing, but the Oly is so much better for focus pulling due to the clutch mechanism and no acceleration.

[jase]

17 minutes ago, Jimbo said:

I owned the 12-35mm, great lens. The focus ring itself is nice enough, but I found it very difficult to consistently focus pull. Unfortunately it does have that annoying acceleration.

For comparison, I find the Leica 15mm much better for focus pulling. Although narrow, it's a nicer ring, has smoother action and has no acceleration.

I sold my 12-35 (for financial reasons, optically it's superb!) and then some months later I bought the Oly 12-40mm. Optically both zooms are amazing, but the Oly is so much better for focus pulling due to the clutch mechanism and no acceleration.

The pity about the oly 12-40 (and in general for all oly lenses that have this manual focus thingy) is, that once you are in the manual mode, you cant use the AF/AE-Lock Button (when configured to AF-ON) to do an occasional AF while otherwise being in this awesome manual mode. When you switch back to the normal mode, the focus ring changes focus again based on speed - very sad, because this would be otherwise the perfect thing. Seems only Canon EF glas is able to provide AF while having a somewhere decent MF at the same time.

[Jimbo]

1 hour ago, jase said:

The pity about the oly 12-40 (and in general for all oly lenses that have this manual focus thingy) is, that once you are in the manual mode, you cant use the AF/AE-Lock Button (when configured to AF-ON) to do an occasional AF while otherwise being in this awesome manual mode. When you switch back to the normal mode, the focus ring changes focus again based on speed - very sad, because this would be otherwise the perfect thing. Seems only Canon EF glas is able to provide AF while having a somewhere decent MF at the same time.

Yes, it is a pity. I haven't found it too frustrating though. I guess it depends how you shoot. I generally only use AF when I'm filming something static.

I haven't used Canon glass on m43, but I've read the AF is slower than native glass.

We should all be using Voigtlanders anyway ;-). Nothing beats that manual feel!

[John Matthews]

WB suggestions for shooting under fluorescent lighting needed. What's the best procedure with the GX80 as I'm after skin color with no green? Should I just shoot with at grey card? Trial and error? So far, I've simply gone for 5600K and A0,M4 (WB), but it still seems a little off. Other settings are Standard Profile (-5,-5,-5,0).

[jonpais]

If you're shooting under a variety of lighting condions, I actually prefer stuff shot under fluorescent to look greenish, early morning or late evening bluish and indoor tungsten to appear orange. 

Sorry if that's not much help...