Panasonic GH5 - all is revealed!

[tomsemiterrific]

This is a post for ANDREW REID---or anyone else who cares to comment.

I recall in a recent article of yours on eoshd.com you said something to the effect that that Panasonic has horrid color, analogous to Sony. That may not be the adjective you used, but it was something quite analogous.

A statement like this compels me to ask:
1. If you think that about Panasonic color why are you interested in buying the GH5?---Especially since you have pretty much rejected the feature rich Sony mirrorless cams for pretty much the same reason--poor color.

2. Are you interested because you think Panasonic's color science will see an improvement with the GH5? Or because you think you can get what you want with V-Log is post processing?

I'm not trying to do a "gotcha" in asking this. I am seriously interested in the GH5, but agree with you 100% on Sony color and the over all "look." So, in buying the GH5 I don't want to buy another Sony I'm unhappy with just for other features...and a lighter set up (which I would love).

The footage I see from Griffin looks fine, yet very little information is forthcoming from him about how he achieved the end result---just how much post production did it take? Did he shoot this in V-log, if so what LUTs did he use, etc. So, right now I'm on the fence. I really love the Canon color--and the EOSHD C-Log works a treat with the 1DX mk II. I love the color of the XC-15 and how well it matches the C300 Mk II. Cameras come and go, but this trio stays with me.

Should I buy the GH5 for run and gun?? Or is there ever hope that Canon will put out a proper mirrorless that is feature rich---such as an XC-15 with three levels of ND, an APS-C sensor, internal stabilization, and interchangeable EF and EF-S lenses? Or will Hell freeze over before that happens?

Enquiring minds want to know.

[jonpais]

4 minutes ago, tomsemiterrific said:

This is a post for ANDREW REID---or anyone else who cares to comment.

I recall in a recent article of yours on eoshd.com you said something to the effect that that Panasonic has horrid color, analogous to Sony. That may not be the adjective you used, but it was something quite analogous.

Could you please take a second and find the link where Andrew Reid says that Panasonic has horrid color before we go any further with this?

[quizno]

Can you name the camera?

 

[jonpais]

19 minutes ago, quizno said:

Can you name the camera?

 

A GH2?

[mercer]

7 minutes ago, jonpais said:

A GH2?

Are you creating user names so you can answer your own questions?

I was gonna say it was a canon in B&W to prove a point that without the color you get a soft image?

But since you're a Panasonic man, I would say it's a GM1?

[jonpais]

10 minutes ago, mercer said:

Are you creating user names so you can answer your own questions?

I was gonna say it was a canon in B&W to prove a point that without the color you get a soft image?

But since you're a Panasonic man, I would say it's a GM1?

I was going to say GM1 too! You are a mind reader! But... no. ? I'm kinda liking my alternate identity.

[dantheman]

5 hours ago, tomsemiterrific said:

is there ever hope that Canon will put out a proper mirrorless that is feature rich---such as an XC-15 with three levels of ND, an APS-C sensor, internal stabilization, and interchangeable EF and EF-S lenses?

Probably at the same time when pigs can fly, you just need to be patient. Why not focus on what is available today, hoping for things that might never happen will only frustrate you. If I understand you right, you have a 1DX mk II, XC-15 and C300 Mk II? Why would you even consider getting a GH5?

[tomsemiterrific]

5 hours ago, jonpais said:

Could you please take a second and find the link where Andrew Reid says that Panasonic has horrid color before we go any further with this?

Well, I didn't say he said it was horrid. I said he said something like that. In his recent review of the G85 he said this:
"I didn’t expect to like it when it came out. On paper and on the shelf it looks a bit boring. There’s Panasonic’s colour science, which is dreadful and a bit like what Sony do. Nothing like a Canon."

So, there you have it. He called Panasonic's color science "dreadful." Now, we can debate the weight of these words, but neither "horrid" nor "dreadful" are what anyone would call complementary. Nicht Wahr?

 

[tomsemiterrific]

15 minutes ago, dantheman said:

Probably at the same time when pigs can fly, you just need to be patient. Why not focus on what is available today, hoping for things that might never happen will only frustrate you. If I understand you right, you have a 1DX mk II, XC-15 and C300 Mk II? Why would you even consider getting a GH5?

That's a very good question. I'll answer it this way. IF the XC-15 were good in low-light I would not dream of using the GH5. But, doing run and gun, sometimes you've got to have a camera good in lower light--I'm not talking about pitch dark, or approximating the A7sII, but good enough in low light, with the right lenses,etc, to come out with low light video like Griffin produced in his GH5 video he did for Panasonic. The five axis stabilization and low light possibilities make it far superior to the XC-15 in that regard. The XC-15 only has a 1 inch sensor and the most open f-stop is 2.8. I find any ISO above 1600 is really pushing it.

Now, I owned a GH4 and it was not very good in low light. But from the results Griffin Hammond gets it's clear to me the GH5 will be a great improvement. Yes, I could use the 1DX mk II in many instances, but the lack of low-light stabilized lenses, and the weight of the lenses and other things preclude it from being a stealthy, run and gun cam. But it IS fantastic.  That said I tried to do a handheld shoot on the 1DX with a Tamron 15-30 constant 2.8 stabilized and put my left shoulder out of commission for about three weeks. MAN, that sucker was heavy. But it worked great.

I'm just trying to get the best tool for the job, and as the market looks now, in sum, the GH5, at least on paper, looks to be the pick of the litter. Make sense?

[jonpais]

1 hour ago, tomsemiterrific said:

Well, I didn't say he said it was horrid. I said he said something like that. In his recent review of the G85 he said this:
"I didn’t expect to like it when it came out. On paper and on the shelf it looks a bit boring. There’s Panasonic’s colour science, which is dreadful and a bit like what Sony do. Nothing like a Canon."

So, there you have it. He called Panasonic's color science "dreadful." Now, we can debate the weight of these words, but neither "horrid" nor "dreadful" are what anyone would call complementary. Nicht Wahr?

 

I wouldn't say Panasonic's colors are horrid - just 'meh'?.

[jonpais]

7 hours ago, tomsemiterrific said:

This is a post for ANDREW REID---or anyone else who cares to comment.

I recall in a recent article of yours on eoshd.com you said something to the effect that that Panasonic has horrid color, analogous to Sony. That may not be the adjective you used, but it was something quite analogous.

A statement like this compels me to ask:
1. If you think that about Panasonic color why are you interested in buying the GH5?---Especially since you have pretty much rejected the feature rich Sony mirrorless cams for pretty much the same reason--poor color.

2. Are you interested because you think Panasonic's color science will see an improvement with the GH5? Or because you think you can get what you want with V-Log is post processing?

I'm not trying to do a "gotcha" in asking this. I am seriously interested in the GH5, but agree with you 100% on Sony color and the over all "look." So, in buying the GH5 I don't want to buy another Sony I'm unhappy with just for other features...and a lighter set up (which I would love).

The footage I see from Griffin looks fine, yet very little information is forthcoming from him about how he achieved the end result---just how much post production did it take? Did he shoot this in V-log, if so what LUTs did he use, etc. So, right now I'm on the fence. I really love the Canon color--and the EOSHD C-Log works a treat with the 1DX mk II. I love the color of the XC-15 and how well it matches the C300 Mk II. Cameras come and go, but this trio stays with me.

Should I buy the GH5 for run and gun?? Or is there ever hope that Canon will put out a proper mirrorless that is feature rich---such as an XC-15 with three levels of ND, an APS-C sensor, internal stabilization, and interchangeable EF and EF-S lenses? Or will Hell freeze over before that happens?

Enquiring minds want to know.

I'm pretty sure Mr. Neumann avoided shooting at higher than ISO 1600, and in the woods scenes, he underexposed and lifted the shadows in post. If you want a general idea of the low light capability of the GH5, the closest thing we have at the moment are tests of the GX80/85 and G80/85. Personally, I'd never shoot higher than ISO 1600 with those cameras, but some members here say ISO 6400 is usable. I would have a look at them yourself and decide. Mr. Neumann shared his Vlog files, so I'm assuming he shot everything in log. His package of LUTs looks great by the way. 

[markr041]

Here is a low-light video using the GX85 and the classic 20mm f1.7 Lumix lens. This gives a hint of the performance of the GH5 not using VLog L:

 

[tomsemiterrific]

2 hours ago, markr041 said:

Here is a low-light video using the GX85 and the classic 20mm f1.7 Lumix lens. This gives a hint of the performance of the GH5 not using VLog L:

 

Thanks, Mark. That looks pretty darn good on a first look. If I get the GH5 I can see I'll be using Canon lenses with a metabones speed booster. I have a Canon 35mm 1.4 that should do pretty well in low light, taking the result the video you shared here as a standard. I think that should be a 1.0 lens with the speed booster. Plus, I have some good Canon zooms that should be great with the in-body 5 axis stability.  My wife has a G7. I think I'll order the Metabones EF to MFT and test it on her G7. 

2 hours ago, jonpais said:

I'm pretty sure Mr. Neumann avoided shooting at higher than ISO 1600, and in the woods scenes, he underexposed and lifted the shadows in post. If you want a general idea of the low light capability of the GH5, the closest thing we have at the moment are tests of the GX80/85 and G80/85. Personally, I'd never shoot higher than ISO 1600 with those cameras, but some members here say ISO 6400 is usable. I would have a look at them yourself and decide. Mr. Neumann shared his Vlog files, so I'm assuming he shot everything in log. His package of LUTs looks great by the way. 

Great information. Where would I find Neumann's footage and LUT package??
Now that you bring it up I have to say I have tended to expose LOG to the right, lifting up the lows into the lower part of the mids. Actually, I've done that to eliminate noise in the darker parts of the image. Do you see a problem with that in V-Log (I've never shot V-log)?

3 hours ago, jonpais said:

I wouldn't say Panasonic's colors are horrid - just 'meh'?.

That was my experience when I owned the GH4. But at that time I didn't know about shooting in LOG, had never done it, and I'm sure I didn't get the best out of the camera. At that time I'd shot Sony camcorders of various types over a period of 7 years and only had the Sony to compare with the GH4. Seeing and working with both the only thing I could say was I liked the Panasonic color better---but neither one knocked me out.

[jonpais]

38 minutes ago, tomsemiterrific said:

Thanks, Mark. That looks pretty darn good on a first look. If I get the GH5 I can see I'll be using Canon lenses with a metabones speed booster. I have a Canon 35mm 1.4 that should do pretty well in low light, taking the result the video you shared here as a standard. I think that should be a 1.0 lens with the speed booster. Plus, I have some good Canon zooms that should be great with the in-body 5 axis stability.  My wife has a G7. I think I'll order the Metabones EF to MFT and test it on her G7. 

Great information. Where would I find Neumann's footage and LUT package??
Now that you bring it up I have to say I have tended to expose LOG to the right, lifting up the lows into the lower part of the mids. Actually, I've done that to eliminate noise in the darker parts of the image. Do you see a problem with that in V-Log (I've never shot V-log)?

That was my experience when I owned the GH4. But at that time I didn't know about shooting in LOG, had never done it, and I'm sure I didn't get the best out of the camera. At that time I'd shot Sony camcorders of various types over a period of 7 years and only had the Sony to compare with the GH4. Seeing and working with both the only thing I could say was I liked the Panasonic color better---but neither one knocked me out.

 Here is the link to the downloadable footage.  If you watch the video below at YouTube, you will find the link to the LUTs in the description.

 

[tomsemiterrific]

19 minutes ago, jonpais said:

 Here is the link to the downloadable footage.  If you watch the video below at YouTube, you will find the link to the LUTs in the description.

 

Great. I had seen the other video, but not this. I really like the explanation. I'll probably end up getting this once I get the GH5.

[Orangenz]

2 hours ago, tomsemiterrific said:

Great information. Where would I find Neumann's footage and LUT package??
Now that you bring it up I have to say I have tended to expose LOG to the right, lifting up the lows into the lower part of the mids. Actually, I've done that to eliminate noise in the darker parts of the image. Do you see a problem with that in V-Log (I've never shot V-log)?

 

 

[jonpais]

5 hours ago, markr041 said:

Here is a low-light video using the GX85 and the classic 20mm f1.7 Lumix lens. This gives a hint of the performance of the GH5 not using VLog L:

Nice job. Handheld very steady looking with the IBIS, excellent sharpness, good exposures and color. Was this at ISO 6400? Was it straight out of the camera?

[markr041]

4 hours ago, jonpais said:

Nice job. Handheld very steady looking with the IBIS, excellent sharpness, good exposures and color. Was this at ISO 6400? Was it straight out of the camera?

Thanks. IBIS really works well with the 20mm. This was shot using the Standard profile; in post I slightly tweaked the WB in some shots and altered luminance and some curves. I do not know what ISO was used; in this light aperture is wide open, shutter speed is fixed and thus all my exposure control was via ISO, and I exposed based on matching what I saw in the scene to what the viewfinder was showing.

[mercer]

@markr041 OT question... do you have the ZS100? And if so can you tell me anything about it's quality. Does the hybrid 5-axis work in 4K? How is the CineLikeD? I have been searching for a small p&s for a while now and other than the slow lens, the ZS100 seems to tick most of the boxes.

[jonpais]

GH5 Rolling Shutter looks pretty good here: