Panasonic GH5 - all is revealed!

[Axel]

6 minutes ago, dantheman said:

If this is the GH5 then focustracking seems to be very unreliable. I also don't understand why he did shoot at that f-stop, at least put on a fast prime and shoot wide open. 

Not sure. You know how it is sometimes easier to keep an sDoF motif in focus manually than an image where everything is almost sharp. But if there won't be a reliable face detection or motif tracking AFC (for gimbal shots), then I know I will never care about the feature at all. Have never seen it work anywhere. Even the A6300, in the slot car shot selected to show off the AF speed it's not convincing imo. It's also a fact that AF needs programming. You have to input what you expect, how should the camera know? Perhaps it's brilliant. Let's wait and see.

[marcuswolschon]

Has anyone with a pre-production GH5 tested the new Bluetooth-LE +Wifi combination?

[Simon Shasha]

2 hours ago, Neumann Films said:

Little 1080/24 test.  35-100 f 2.8 (v1)/ISO 400/VLogL/WB "Sunny".  Not sure if IS was on, didn't have the notification on the LCD and it looked a little shaky.  Wonder if IS isn't ready for 1080p yet (firmware).  Basically, don't judge the IS either way.  I don't think it was activated but the fact that it isn't is no cause for alarm as this is an early prototype.

http://www.mediafire.com/file/j86ttg6otkmb1ma/P1000108.MP4

Detail is great. Rolling-shutter looks virtually non-existent.

[jonpais]

What does the camera smell like?

[Julu]

3 hours ago, Neumann Films said:

Little 1080/24 test.  35-100 f 2.8 (v1)/ISO 400/VLogL/WB "Sunny".  Not sure if IS was on, didn't have the notification on the LCD and it looked a little shaky.  Wonder if IS isn't ready for 1080p yet (firmware).  Basically, don't judge the IS either way.  I don't think it was activated but the fact that it isn't is no cause for alarm as this is an early prototype.

http://www.mediafire.com/file/j86ttg6otkmb1ma/P1000108.MP4

Hmm not sure is it as fast as NX1 1080p.. But should be good enought.

Thanks for your clips!

[Neumann Films]

42 minutes ago, jonpais said:

What does the camera smell like?

Hamsters and Elderberries

[Thpriest]

1 hour ago, Neumann Films said:

Hamsters and Elderberries

Same old Panasonic, they never listen to their customers. I asked for newt and curly kale smell. Or at least charred meat like Sony. Hamsters and elderberries are never going to cut it in lowlight. I need something more pungent to be able to find my camera in the dark.

[Neumann Films]

8 minutes ago, Thpriest said:

Same old Panasonic, they never listen to their customers. I asked for newt and curly kale smell. Or at least charred meat like Sony. Hamsters and elderberries are never going to cut it in lowlight. I need something more pungent to be able to find my camera in the dark.

Right?  At the very least a hot shoe shrubbery accessory for those difficult shooting conditions in the forest of Ni.

[marcuswolschon]

8 minutes ago, Thpriest said:

Same old Panasonic, they never listen to their customers. I asked for newt and curly kale smell. Or at least charred meat like Sony. Hamsters and elderberries are never going to cut it in lowlight. I need something more pungent to be able to find my camera in the dark.

Dear Mr Thpriest,

would you like to try again using the English language?

Otherwise it may happen that your choice of wording gets confused with modern art.

Kind regards.

[Thpriest]

8 minutes ago, Neumann Films said:

Right?  At the very least a hot shoe shrubbery accessory for those difficult shooting conditions in the forest of Ni.

Niii! Exactly. I thought the old Sony slogan of "Wolf nipple chips, get them while they're hot! They're lovely!" was a bit close to the bone (don't try to put an a6300 in you shirt pocket after shooting 4k for 15mins...er.. seconds).

 

[Neumann Films]

2 minutes ago, Thpriest said:

Niii! Exactly. I thought the old Sony slogan of "Wolf nipple chips, get them while they're hot! They're lovely!" was a bit close to the bone (don't try to put an a6300 in you shirt pocket after shooting 4k for 15mins...er.. seconds).

 

Hahahah! Well done.

[jonpais]

Don't know if anyone's shared this video yet.

 

[Fritz Pierre]

On January 17, 2017 at 10:03 PM, Neumann Films said:

Thanks, yeah all new LUTs.  I have always liked using a Speedbooster, I dunno.  I could go back and forth, at times I want more in focus and really would want that stabilization.  I would almost keep a Speedbooster on hand for low light and shallow DOF stuff.  It definitely makes the camera more versatile. 

@Neumann Films Sorry....I confused you with someone else I must have read about, who said they never use speed boosters...do I find your LUT pack on your website...been using Leeming's LUT on the GH4 but I think with this camera/LUT combo you're hitting it out of the ballpark....any info regarding your LUTS will be appreciated...I would be using it in FCPX, but would also be giving it to my DP, who's also my colorist. Let me know if that is acceptable, so feel free to PM me if you prefer to do it that way...

[Arikhan]

@Axel

I tested the Pana AF modes intensively (last time two weeks ago) with the FZ1000. The more you test different modes and scenarios, the more usable it will be for shooters needing a reliable AF in combination with MF. I compared it with the very good AF of the NX1. (Personally I consider Canons DPAF to be number one, some Sony cameras numjber two, NX1 and X-T2 number 3)

The test: FZ1000 + NX1 both set on face recognition, subject walking forth camera, cameraman walking back in round about 1,2m distance to subject. Both cameras with F2.8. Results were absolutely comparable, Pana with no wobbling or hunting. The subject did a moderate walk (not slow, not fast)...I wouldn't have expected this...
With "multi area" (eg subject turns face away from camera), the Pana is hunting, oftenly searching for more contrasty structures (background). In these cases (intensively tested too), it is very useful to determine a flexible AF area - the extent of the AF area can be extended - which can be moved in every direction and place you want. Using this method, focus never hunts (in static situations), even if background is much more contrasty than the subject: You just have to keep your subject within the predetermined focusing area.
There are many complaints on the pana AF hunting (hunting for more contrast, "wobbling" etc. in AF) but I think, users should test more the different modes and adapt this to their preferences...

I don't know  (I never hold the GH5 in my hands) but to be honest, I don't expect an AF similar to the big "AF-Gorillas" (Canon, Sony, Samsung and Fuji as descripted above), but I find the Pana AF usable. I used it in quite "impossible" situations and in the dark (a night concert on a stage in Romania) and - despite the 1" sensor and crop - it did very well at long zoom (about F4). It tracked faces like hell, I was very happy - i never would expect it but this showed me how important it is to extensively test for knowing how to handle camera strengths and limitations...

[jonpais]

This may not pertain to what Fritz is referring to, but from watching the video above, it appears that when purchasing V-Log L, you also get four LUTs which you can use to view a sort of graded image in-camera or through an external recorder. I never shot V-Log with my GH4, one of the reasons being it looked like mush in the viewfinder, the other being it really requires 10 bit for good quality. The GH5 should solve both of those issues. So I don't belong to the camp that says they wouldn't buy the camera if they have to pay for something that unlocks extra features. What I do object to is the 1990s way they are distributing it.

[jonpais]

17 minutes ago, Arikhan said:

@Axel

I tested the Pana AF modes intensively (last time two weeks ago) with the FZ1000. The more you test different modes and scenarios, the more usable it will be for shooters needing a reliable AF in combination with MF. I compared it with the very good AF of the NX1. (Personally I consider Canons DPAF to be number one, some Sony cameras numjber two, NX1 and X-T2 number 3)

The test: FZ1000 + NX1 both set on face recognition, subject walking forth camera, cameraman walking back in round about 1,2m distance to subject. Both cameras with F2.8. Results were absolutely comparable, Pana with no wobbling or hunting. The subject did a moderate walk (not slow, not fast)...I wouldn't have expected this...
With "multi area" (eg subject turns face away from camera), the Pana is hunting, oftenly searching for more contrasty structures (background). In these cases (intensively tested too), it is very useful to determine a flexible AF area - the extent of the AF area can be extended - which can be moved in every direction and place you want. Using this method, focus never hunts (in static situations), even if background is much more contrasty than the subject: You just have to keep your subject within the predetermined focusing area.
There are many complaints on the pana AF hunting (hunting for more contrast, "wobbling" etc. in AF) but I think, users should test more the different modes and adapt this to their preferences...

I don't know  (I never hold the GH5 in my hands) but to be honest, I don't expect an AF similar to the big "AF-Gorillas" (Canon, Sony, Samsung and Fuji as descripted above), but I find the Pana AF usable. I used it in quite "impossible" situations and in the dark (a night concert on a stage in Romania) and - despite the 1" sensor and crop - it did very well at long zoom (about F4). It tracked faces like hell, I was very happy - i never would expect it but this showed me how important it is to extensively test for knowing how to handle camera strengths and limitations...

You bring up some interesting points, Arikhan. For one thing, in the past, I always relied on others, especially YouTubers, to do the testing for me and tell me what the best settings to use were. Since purchasing the Lumix G85, I've been doing a lot of my own evaluating, and I think the settings I've come up with work best for me, much better in fact than just sheepishly following what others recommended. Of course, we are all here to share information, but that doesn't relieve the responsibility of testing yourself. Concerning AF, Lumix cameras have for a while now had some of the fastest single point AF around, and the GH5 is without question going to kill it, with it's ability to read the sensor twice as fast, and with all those focus points. The joystick will come in handy as well, since one thing that troubles me about touch focus on all my Panasonic cameras is that the actual focusing area is really the size of the tip of my finger - quite a large area in fact, and hardly accurate enough for demanding work. The joystick will allow much more precision. As far as AF-C goes, I tried it a few times, it did not work well at all, and I gave up on it entirely. Which is why I admire the fact that you are even trying to see how it can be made to work, and under which conditions. I have been recommending to Panasonic owners that, if they are shooting a person (clothed or unclothed, makes no difference) that they have them wear something shiny or contrasty, like sunglasses, a striped shirt, a necklace - because i've found the contrast detection can lock onto those quite easily. The camera will also tenaciously hold focus on a person if their hair happens to be backlighted, at least it does for me. And in the event that I absolutely must use AF at all, I usually initiate recording in manual mode, so I can at least see focus peaking to confirm focus. Otherwise, with a low resolution LCD, it's virtually impossible to know whether you've got the shot in the bag until you get back to your home or office and view the clips on your monitor. The high resolution EVF and LCD on the GH5 should go a long way toward alleviating those headaches.

[jonpais]

47 minutes ago, Arikhan said:

@Axel

I don't know  (I never hold the GH5 in my hands) but to be honest, I don't expect an AF similar to the big "AF-Gorillas" (Canon, Sony, Samsung and Fuji as descripted above), but I find the Pana AF usable. I used it in quite "impossible" situations and in the dark (a night concert on a stage in Romania) and - despite the 1" sensor and crop - it did very well at long zoom (about F4). It tracked faces like hell, I was very happy - i never would expect it but this showed me how important it is to extensively test for knowing how to handle camera strengths and limitations...

Wouldn't a 1" sensor be more forgiving than an APS-C sensor?  

[Axel]

2 hours ago, jonpais said:

Don't know if anyone's shared this video yet.

(...)

Interesting details not mentioned elsewhere. For instance the part about the fine-tuneable AF modes.

54 minutes ago, Arikhan said:

@Axel

I don't know  (I never hold the GH5 in my hands) but to be honest, I don't expect an AF similar to the big "AF-Gorillas" (Canon, Sony, Samsung and Fuji as descripted above), but I find the Pana AF usable. I used it in quite "impossible" situations and in the dark (a night concert on a stage in Romania) and - despite the 1" sensor and crop - it did very well at long zoom (about F4). It tracked faces like hell, I was very happy - i never would expect it but this showed me how important it is to extensively test for knowing how to handle camera limitations...

My objection against AF with big sensor cameras (well, at least compared to traditional camcorders, MFT is still a big sensor) always was that even the smartest camera software couldn't decide what part of the image should be in focus, whether it was supposed to stay in focus if it moved or how sensitive it should react when the focus changed briefly. I saw this problem in an interview I had to edit, a talking head. Whenever the woman shifted slightly in her seat, went oof just for ten frames, the AF felt obliged to react to that, and it looked terrible. I told the camera operator he should have better focussed manually once.

There has to be a profile you can set in advance, one that tells the AF how to behave. It's about setting a treshold and then some kind of ease-in, ease-out. Yes, I understand that in order to adjust focus in a way that looks organic, the AF has to be insanely fast. A computer driven motor can only accelerate smoothly by approximating the target position in many incremental steps, in between analyzing the progress. Many contemporary CAF systems still do it wrongly, they jump beyond the point, then back and forth, and with the object moving across the frame, they never stop. 

I'm planning a short about the thoughts crossing the mind of a jogger. He needs to be don-juaned by a gimbal. A good continous AF would come in handy ...

[jonpais]

37 minutes ago, Axel said:

Interesting details not mentioned elsewhere. For instance the part about the fine-tuneable AF modes.

My objection against AF with big sensor cameras (well, at least compared to traditional camcorders, MFT is still a big sensor) always was that even the smartest camera software couldn't decide what part of the image should be in focus, whether it was supposed to stay in focus if it moved or how sensitive it should react when the focus changed briefly. I saw this problem in an interview I had to edit, a talking head. Whenever the woman shifted slightly in her seat, went oof just for ten frames, the AF felt obliged to react to that, and it looked terrible. I told the camera operator he should have better focussed manually once.

There has to be a profile you can set in advance, one that tells the AF how to behave. It's about setting a treshold and then some kind of ease-in, ease-out. Yes, I understand that in order to adjust focus in a way that looks organic, the AF has to be insanely fast. A computer driven motor can only accelerate smoothly by approximating the target position in many incremental steps, in between analyzing the progress. Many contemporary CAF systems still do it wrong, they jump beyond the point, then back and forth, and with the object moving across the frame, they never stop. 

I watched a Dave Dugdale video once, I believe he was testing the AF ability of one of the Sony cameras, and to the best of my recollection, I think he actually said he usually uses AF for interviews this way. Anyway, that's how I remember it, my memory could be faulty, I'm 60 years old after all. But there are times I actually prefer MF because I don't want the subject to remain continuously in focus, at least in expressive work. So, for example, if I'm doing a tight shot (or whatever it's called in filmmaking parlance) of someone's head, when they move slightly, I like it to go out of focus for a moment. I really, truly detest the word organic, but that's how I feel about focus. AF can look mechanical, machine-like, whereas if a subject moves beyond the range of depth of field for an instant, I think it looks much more natural. Again, I will stress, this is for my personal work only, not for a job where you're filming an interview. And I'm not talking about transition speeds between one point and another here, either (Arikahn mentioned the X-T2's AF, and I immediately thought of how abruptly it can change focus points compared to the smoother transition of say, Sony cameras).

I'm now thinking, since we're having this discussion, that at some point in the very near future, I'm going to invest in focus pulling gear, because I really don't want the camera making decisions for me. I understand that for commercial work, AF is rapidly gaining acceptance, but for personal work, I'm starting to believe it can be a hindrance. Not that I use it much anyway.

I could go on and on... Recently, I've been noticing just how often that while I am focusing, (and I have the menu set to focus assist whenever I touch the focus ring on the lens), that I forget I'm in focus assist; and I go to change exposure with the dial, and instead of changing exposure, I've changed the magnification from 3X to 10X or something. Very annoying! And anyone who's ever used a Panasonic camera knows how useless 10X magnification is (you can no longer see focus peaking, for one thing). I don't know what Panasonic could do to avoid this from happening. Has anyone else here had this same problem? 

[Axel]

3 minutes ago, jonpais said:

I really, truly detest the word organic, but that's how I feel about focus.

I am not a native speaker, I can't feel those niceties. I use many terms because others use them and so they seem appropriate. Should I have written natural instead? I don't think so. Focus isn't anything you are away of when seeing the world around you. Sure, you can hold your index finger in front of your nose and simultaneously look at the television tower on the horizon, but you wouldn't usually do that. DoF only exists in images, it has to do with aesthetics and sometimes with film language. She was so absorbed in thoughts, the world around her blurred. What we do though (but not by visually blurring the background and thereby isolating the object of interest) is that we perceive selectively. Test this: watch one individual in a crowd for a few minutes. You'll notice that you drift into some kind of trance. You know that there are other people around, cars, trees, traffic signs, you actually see them peripherally, but they become marginal. Your FoV is vignetted - it really physically is, like right now. I know there stands a bookshelf on my right side while I'm looking at the monitor, I know the books have different colors, but it's just as if they were blurred. 

Focussing has to feel right. How can you teach a software to make an adjustment feel right? Only if it allows you to program it.