Panasonic G85 review - is there any need to get an Olympus E-M1 Mark II for video?

[PannySVHS]

9 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

Man you Need a Sony A7s using Slog 2. The DR on that G85 is just not going to get the job done.

That sentence puts a smile on my face. I am grading A7s Slog lowlight footage at the moment. Camera peeps would have been better off shooting 709 with an G85 at ISO1600 plus speedbooster, producing superiour color for that purpose. "Just not going to get the job done." puts an even greater smile on my face

[webrunner5]

43 minutes ago, PannySVHS said:

That sentence puts a smile on my face. I am grading A7s Slog lowlight footage at the moment. Camera peeps would have been better off shooting 709 with an G85 at ISO1600 plus speedbooster, producing superiour color for that purpose. "Just not going to get the job done." puts an even greater smile on my face

Truth be known even an Arri is not going to get the job done on stage productions. You would have to have 20 stops of DR, perfect auto WB, perfect auto ISO, and have clean footage at 56,000 ISO. Probably the worst changing, challenging, lighting in the world. Every scene is a lighting change, every time a spotlight is moved even worse. No camera can do it justice. Oh an then you have the Audio challenge. Probably some of the worse you can encounter also. It would be the last gig I would ever want to get into as trying to make a living at shooting it.

[Grimor]

I'm keeping that G85 have better lowlight than GH5

[webrunner5]

2 minutes ago, Grimor said:

I'm keeping that G85 have better lowlight than GH5

That is not saying much LoL. But yeah you are right.

[mercer]

@Vintage Jimothy look for a used LX100. It will match up well with your G85 and give you some quick reach, and a fast lens, for impromptu close ups... you’re basically buying a dirt cheap f/1.8-2.8 24-75mm lens that doesn’t need to be swapped out. 

I wouldn’t even worry about lights too much with the verite shooting you’re describing... maybe one or two cheap on camera LEDs to attach to an L-Bracket.

[Grimor]

8 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

That is not saying much LoL. But yeah you are right.

I read somewhere that pixel density was the reason for that, so less resolution sensor/ best low light capabilities.

But maybe we need a proper test...

 

[webrunner5]

Does the the G85 and the GX80 the same sensor? We all know the GH5s is a huge advancement over the GH5 for low light. Panasonic should have just put IBIS in the GH5s, lowered the price of it to the price of the GH5 and stopped making the GH5. It is obvious that the sensor can't be that expensive by looking at the PK4 cost.

And then come up with some way to lock the IBIS mechanism and be done with it. Doesn't the Nikon Z7 have that option?

[Vintage Jimothy]

Got back earlier from the first night of shooting for the first gig. Overall, I'd say it went quite well. It wasn't at a traditional theater, so the lighting was a lot better (albeit also probably plainer looking) than future videos will be. 

Having said that: Thank God I had my Helios on me, because that lens saved my life tonight! Unfortunately I couldn't get close enough to the actors and stage as often as I'd have liked (it's a bit of a weird stage in layout), so I mostly had my G85 placed on my tripod with the Helios and pulled focus manually as the actors rehearsed the play and I moved my tripod across the room from time to time to get a variety of shots from different angles. 

Seriously, never imagined that I'd (mostly) enjoy shooting at a 116mm (plus) focal length, but that extended reach helped immensely tonight. Just had issues from time to time with the tighter framing and messing up my focus pulls, though the latter is on me and not the lens. 

EDIT: That said, I'm starting to think more and more about @webrunner5's suggestion of picking up a used Sony a7s. It's hardly my dream camera and normally I'd flinch at the thought of buying an even older camera than the G85 to replace it as my main workhorse.

But realistically, it does seem like an ideal option within a reachable price range: Higher dynamic range, vastly superior low light capabilities and shooting in 1080p isn't the worst thing in the world. Plus if I need to get back to shooting 4K footage again, I can pick up an Atomos Ninja V to get dat 4:2:2 4K footage externally. 

Either way, that's a transition I won't be able to move towards for awhile now anyway. There's other gear I need to pick up rather fast too and it'd take awhile to save up the $800-ish needed to buy a used a7s and whatever additional money needed to pick up one or two vintage lens adapters and a couple more vintage lenses. 

[IronFilm]

22 minutes ago, Vintage Jimothy said:

Having said that: Thank God I had my Helios on me, because that lens saved my life tonight! Unfortunately I couldn't get close enough to the actors and stage as often as I'd have liked (it's a bit of a weird stage in layout), so I mostly had my G85 placed on my tripod with the Helios and pulled focus manually as the actors rehearsed the play and I moved my tripod across the room from time to time to get a variety of shots from different angles. 

I was expecting you'd need more reach than width!
 

24 minutes ago, Vintage Jimothy said:

EDIT: That said, I'm starting to think more and more about @webrunner5's suggestion of picking up a used Sony a7s. It's hardly my dream camera and normally I'd flinch at the thought of buying an even older camera than the G85 to replace it as my main workhorse.

Eh, I disagree, reckon there is a lot of other things you could get instead than another camera

[webrunner5]

Also the original A7s has some of the nicest looking 1080p out there. A C100 is probably better with it's CS. But I don't know what to tell you.  It is tough shooting conditions no mater what you use. I would get on Vimeo, You Tube and see if you can find some plays shot and see what they are using if it looks pretty good. Maybe it is not as hard now with these newer cameras as I imagine??

11 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

I was expecting you'd need more reach than width!
 

Eh, I disagree, reckon there is a lot of other things you could get instead than another camera

I guess a Speedbooster and a 0.95 lens would help. But then you loose reach. You can't add lighting. They are Not going to let you do that on Any serious project, even little middle school plays have been done over for years and years. They have the mood, ambience molded in. They are not going to let you screw that up.

[IronFilm]

8 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Maybe it is not as hard now with these newer cameras as I imagine??

Heck, I've shot stages performances on my GH1 when I first got it! 
Even remember ages ago shooting a stage performance with a SD ENG camera!

At a certain point you need to just accept you're getting $$$ for a project and you're giving the client $$$$$$ worth of deliveries, so stop throwing your own money at it!

Except in this case the person is only getting ¢¢¢ for the project!  Not even $$

Thus the G85 is already waaaay overdelivering for the project's requirements. 

 

[Vintage Jimothy]

2 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Also the original A7s has some of the nicest looking 1080p out there. A C100 is probably better with it's CS. But I don't know what to tell you.  It is tough shooting conditions no mater what you use. I would get on Vimeo, You Tube and see if you can find some plays shot and see what they are using if it looks pretty good. Maybe it is not as hard now with these newer cameras as I imagine??

I mean, it's not like I'll be getting an a7s (or any new camera for that matter) by springtime anyway, unless I apply for another job to get more income faster. But ultimately I might opt to look into changing to a different camera so that I have something more geared to my needs as a filmmaker right now. We'll see.

6 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Heck, I've shot stages performances on my GH1 when I first got it! 
Even remember ages ago shooting a stage performance with a SD ENG camera!

At a certain point you need to just accept you're getting $$$ for a project and you're giving the client $$$$$$ worth of deliveries, so stop throwing your own money at it!

Except in this case the person is only getting ¢¢¢ for the project!  Not even $$

Thus the G85 is already waaaay overdelivering for the project's requirements. 

No arguments there. I love my G85 and I still think I made the right call in picking that as my first camera. But it's been a bit of an eye opener to get a feel for its weaknesses and how that impacts a lot of my personal needs as a filmmaker.

[webrunner5]

1 minute ago, IronFilm said:

Heck, I've shot stages performances on my GH1 when I first got it! 
Even remember ages ago shooting a stage performance with a SD ENG camera!

At a certain point you need to just accept you're getting $$$ for a project and you're giving the client $$$$$$ worth of deliveries, so stop throwing your own money at it!

Except in this case the person is only getting ¢¢¢ for the project!  Not even $$

Thus the G85 is already waaaay overdelivering for the project's requirements. 

 

Hell with your mindset he ought to just use a Smartphone. Probably better than your GH1 was then. If so why do they even need him at all?  Not everyone want to Half Ass stuff. It is a learning experience as much as anything. I am sure they aren't expecting Pro results. But Maybe it can lead to money paying jobs.

Every school in the world, every local arts divisions have plays. Opera Houses etc. Somebody is getting paid to shoot some of it. Plus it would be interesting work to be able to see free plays, Operas! ?

2 minutes ago, Vintage Jimothy said:

No arguments there. I love my G85 and I still think I made the right call in picking that as my first camera. But it's been a bit of an eye opener to get a feel for its weaknesses and how that impacts a lot of my personal needs as a filmmaker.

Oh you don''t have to make any excuses about buying the G85. I would like to have one myself. They are a great film making camera for the money. It can do a lot more than you probably have skill to extract from it. Like I said it is not the camera. It is what is between your two ears that count. Skill, and that takes practice and time.

[Vintage Jimothy]

13 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Oh you don''t have to make any excuses about buying the G85. I would like to have one myself. They are a great film making camera for the money. It can do a lot more than you probably have skill to extract from it. Like I said it is not the camera. It is what is between your two ears that count. Skill, and that takes practice and time.

Mhmm, no arguments there. As I said earlier, a lot of this comes down to "wants vs needs." I'd want a camera that can handle better in low light. I don't necessarily need it though.

[IronFilm]

21 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Hell with your mindset he ought to just use a Smartphone. 

No. That isn't at all my mindset. 

My mindset is use what he has at hand, and if he already is overdelevering for the level of this project, why should he sink even more of his own money into it? 
Especially when I'm sure even with his own gear as it is now, he still has a long way further he could improve! Without spending another penny extra. 

21 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

It can do a lot more than you probably have skill to extract from it. Like I said it is not the camera. It is what is between your two ears that count. Skill, and that takes practice and time.

Exactly!! 

Yet another reason for why not to spend more money in buying an a7S

[mercer]

Well, he really wouldn’t be spending more money... well a little more. He’d get about $600 for his G85 and could find an a7s for around $700-800. The extra $200 spent will open opportunities that saves him money with other gear. He wouldn’t need lights. He’ll gain the FF FOV. He’ll gain dynamic range. 

I agree that you don’t want to put money into it if you don’t need to but in this instance, there is definitely a justification that can only help him do his job and in the end, he’ll save money in time. 

[webrunner5]

20 minutes ago, mercer said:

Well, he really wouldn’t be spending more money... well a little more. He’d get about $600 for his G85 and could find an a7s for around $700-800. The extra $200 spent will open opportunities that saves him money with other gear. He wouldn’t need lights. He’ll gain the FF FOV. He’ll gain dynamic range. 

I agree that you don’t want to put money into it if you don’t need to but in this instance, there is definitely a justification that can only help him do his job and in the end, he’ll save money in time. 

Completely agree. But if he only going to do this a few times and not get serious about why bother I guess. I can see that point also. Overall the G85 is good enough, and AF lenses are cheaper for m4/3. Like I said, I wouldn't get involved with it at all to be honest. You can't win no matter how much money you throw at it. Even a A7s doesn't have enough DR to really get the job done. You would have to have a Red VV to get serious results. And even then you need more than one camera operator and camera.

Every one I have shot at you had to be in the VERY back and needed a 100-400 lens to shoot it LoL. And hope you brought your 1.4, 2x extenders with you. You are Not going to be walking around in front of the front seats blocking peoples view, or have a tripod blocking the aisles. Ain't happening. Not counting you are not going to be able to Add lighting.

Now sure someone like the BBC might come in there and do that. But not just Bob I can tell you that. Parents and people that payed 500 dollars for a front row seat maybe might get a bit pissed off. ?

[mercer]

1 hour ago, webrunner5 said:

Completely agree. But if he only going to do this a few times and not get serious about why bother I guess. I can see that point also. Overall the G85 is good enough, and AF lenses are cheaper for m4/3. Like I said, I wouldn't get involved with it at all to be honest. You can't win no matter how much money you throw at it. Even a A7s doesn't have enough DR to really get the job done. You would have to have a Red VV to get serious results. And even then you need more than one camera operator and camera.

Every one I have shot at you had to be in the VERY back and needed a 100-400 lens to shoot it LoL. And hope you brought your 1.4, 2x extenders with you.

That’s true, I can strongly assume that most of the people doing this kind of work are using an 80D. And that’s the camera I would use. For me, the DPAF would be the most valuable feature. I assume Timothy knows the actor’s cues, so he can set the face tracking accordingly, I think. 

With that being said, the G85 is a great camera with a nice output, so I’m sure it will work great for his needs. As they say, the best camera is the one you already own. 

[IronFilm]

9 hours ago, mercer said:

Well, he really wouldn’t be spending more money... well a little more. He’d get about $600 for his G85 and could find an a7s for around $700-800. The extra $200 spent will open opportunities that saves him money with other gear. He wouldn’t need lights. He’ll gain the FF FOV. He’ll gain dynamic range. 

That is assuming he wants to sell his G85, which I don't think he wants to do. 

And if he did that then he'd be losing a lot of features of the G85:
Better battery life, IBIS, 4K, weather proofing, etc

[webrunner5]

1 hour ago, IronFilm said:

That is assuming he wants to sell his G85, which I don't think he wants to do. 

And if he did that then he'd be losing a lot of features of the G85:
Better battery life, IBIS, 4K, weather proofing, etc

I just want to say that the original Sony A7s Can do 4K, but you Have to have a external recorder to do it. So as not to confuse newer people who might not be up on them, since the A7s is older now. Proceed LoL.