Panasonic GH5 - all is revealed!

[Neumann Films]

Just now, jonpais said:

I suppose V-log is non-refundable though. ?

Actually, I'm pretty sure the version of it currently being used in the pre production cameras is the same one from the GH4.  So it's a profile created for an 8bit image.  Now, I'm not saying the version that will ship with the cameras will be v2 and tailored for 10bit solving any stepping or artifacting.  I noticed some of that in my footage but only where I was doing some crazy grading and color temps were clashing.  That happens on RED cameras too though (and they claim to be 16bit).  So...I dunno.  It's part Log profile that was made for a different camera, part 10bit is still not 16bit, part...unless you're working in 32bit float point and really take your time with a grade...you will still see some of that stuff.

[Philip Lipetz]

 The only thing that really concerns me is the suggestion made by several people and threads spread throughout the web that the 10 bit information is produced by dithering an eight bit internal signal. There is absolutely no evidence that this is true, but it is being reported as a possible explanation for this and other phenomenal reported in GH5 testing. Again There is absolutely no evidence that this is true, they suggest the dithering arises in the compression to 150mbs. 

[Fritz Pierre]

With every new GH release Panasonic is now taking the camera to a whole  new level...and then everybody else tries to  play catch up....although for my needs, the competition never quite does...that leaves the only other alternative, of attacking the camera....spreading false rumors and doing tests and a review in a "lab" that's frankly ridiculous....The why does not concern me...all on a camera that is not officially out in the world yet....and the samples which were produced in the first footage release, were by people who only had the camera in their possession for a few days....and yet...already some lovely footage out there....will only fully be upgraded with the high bit-rate FW in the late Summer of 2017....most people who have used GH4's in the past, know how robust and reliable these cameras are and understand that if used properly they excel,  have probably already made up their mind anyway!....Not sure why Panasonic passed up Andrew Reid with a pre-release model (a strategic mistake in my view, on their part) as even in spite of that, Andrew is maintaining an objective viewpoint of this camera's ability....I appreciate his integrity though, and as with all reviews, be it films, cameras or books....you find the resource you trust for information, and discard the crap....

[Borbarad]

6 minutes ago, Fritz Pierre said:

With every new GH release Panasonic is now taking the camera to a whole  new level...and then everybody else tries to  play catch up....although for my needs, the competition never quite does...that leaves the only other alternative, of attacking the camera....spreading false rumors and doing tests and a review in a "lab" that's frankly ridiculous....The why does not concern me...all on a camera that is not officially out in the world yet....and the samples which were produced in the first footage release, were by people who only had the camera in their possession for a few days....and yet...already some lovely footage out there....will only fully be upgraded with the high bit-rate FW in the late Summer of 2017....most people who have used GH4's in the past, know how robust and reliable these cameras are and understand that if used properly they excel,  have probably already made up their mind anyway!....Not sure why Panasonic passed up Andrew Reid with a pre-release model (a strategic mistake in my view, on their part) as even in spite of that, Andrew is maintaining an objective viewpoint of this camera's ability....I appreciate his integrity though, and as with all reviews, be it films, cameras or books....you find the resource you trust for information, and discard the crap....

 Totally agree! Everybody things the A7sIII will be the one, but I hardly believe at this stage the will even do 10Bit internal and then fix some of the other "issues" (i.e. fix the body).

If you read the PDF and watch at some of those lengthy explanation Videos  you would realize that the GH5 will be a feature monster. As for video quality im not worried the slightest as it builds up on the great GH4. Moreover the GH5 might be the fist one where Panasonic is on top of Olympus. 

 

B

[webrunner5]

That was some serious resolution on the opening shot! And colors really did pop.

[zmarty]

I have the GH5 on preorder and I am checking YouTube often for sample videos.

I cannot figure out if the video below was already discussed, but it seems 10 bit video is way more noisy than 8 bit on the GH5, which I find unacceptable. And my opinion is that it cannot be because of the codec/compression, it's more than that.

I am looking at the video on a 4K screen but I am sure the problem is apparent on smaller resolutions too.

The original file (which is 8 bit) can be found here, it's linked in the description: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0YX2ibzpZ8VLWxiNHFFUkhLQTQ/view?usp=sharing&pageId=108428603654979960847

 

[Phil A]

https://www.slashcam.de/artikel/Test/Panasonic-GH5-Sensor-Verhalten---Aufloesung--Slowmo--Rolling-Shutter-.html

Next part of the german Slashcam review is online.

What surprised me: they say in photo mode the crop to FullFrame is 2.08 and for video it's 2.26? I thought it's a straight 2 for both.

[jonpais]

@Phil A I thought the same as you.

Using Google translate, the SlashCAM review says,  

In all video modes, only an estimated 4768 horizontal pixels are used, which corresponds to a crop factor of 2.26. This is true for full, 4K-UHD as well as for Cine4K formats. Unexpected exception is slow motion (see below).

Other stuff I found along the way, they also recommend dialing sharpening down as far as it will go, and note that it is possible to reduce sharpening a bit more than with the GH4. Oversharpening is something I've remarked in a number of videos we've already seen online. They also observe that the base ISO is 400, not only in V-log, but also in Standard Picture Profile. They seem quite impressed with the camera.

[Phil A]

Indeed. Quick summary of that part of the review:

With sharpening and NR on minimum they are happy with the image quality. They remark o how good the 60p 4k looks, only slight degradation which they think is the difference between 8bit and 10bit due to the white and black points.

They think the 2k mode (I guess 1080p, not actually 2k?) is really good and scales remarkably well with no artifacts (listen up Sony, stop giving us super sucky 1080p).

Above 60fps there's no full sensor read out anymore, which is not a real surprise. They see two steps in quality, one up to 75fps and then another up to 180fps. There is line skipping so they get moire and aliasing but they still believe it is usable in reality. There is a demo video embedded where they mixed 4k and high frame rates.

In the VariableFramerateSettings for slowmo, they camera reads from the full sensor width like in photo mode.

The congratulate the really low rolling shutter. Panasonic says 15ms and they think it is accurate.

Base ISO is 400.

LowLight behaviour is okish. It's good up to 1600, 3200 is acceptable and 6400 is worse. Noise Reduction can't be completely deactivated and they muse if 150 Mbit/s is still not sufficient in 10bit high iso. I guess we'll see if there's improvement when the 400 Mbit/s firmware drops.

[deezid]

1 hour ago, jonpais said:

@Phil A I thought the same as you.

Using Google translate, the SlashCAM review says,  

In all video modes, only an estimated 4768 horizontal pixels are used, which corresponds to a crop factor of 2.26. This is true for full, 4K-UHD as well as for Cine4K formats. Unexpected exception is slow motion (see below).

Other stuff I found along the way, they also recommend dialing sharpening down as far as it will go, and note that it is possible to reduce sharpening a bit more than with the GH4. Oversharpening is something I've remarked in a number of videos we've already seen online. They also observe that the base ISO is 400, not only in V-log, but also in Standard Picture Profile. They seem quite impressed with the camera.

Maybe we start seeing some Videos without this ridiculous oversharpening from now on.

 

Nah... :D
I really don't get why people love this oversharpened videolook, even Emmanuel Pampuri does (discussed with him on this topic)...
It affects fine detail and motion cadence in a very bad way as well, but nobody cares...

[jonpais]

2 minutes ago, deezid said:

Maybe we start seeing some Videos without oversharpening from now on.

 

Nah... :D
I really don't get why people love this oversharpened videolook, even Emmanuel Pampuri does (discussed with him on this topic)...

Maybe it's got to do with how they're viewing the videos? I use a 27" iMac, maybe it's not so bothersome on a 75" backlit OLED HDR television?

[deezid]

5 minutes ago, jonpais said:

Maybe it's got to do with how they're viewing the videos? I use a 27" iMac, maybe it's not so bothersome on a 75" backlit OLED HDR television?

I use two 4k screens. One 27" IPS LG calibrated (Delta values below 1 for each color). And a 40" Philipps MVA screen. 
The bigger the screen is, the worse the sharpening looks.

What I don't understand is, why do people love videoish sharpening?

[deezid]

Sharpening 0 equals to Sharpening -5 + an unsharp mask of 2.2px and 50% applied
(Actually could be 2Px width as well)

[Cas1]

29 minutes ago, deezid said:

I use two 4k screens. One 27" IPS LG calibrated (Delta values below 1 for each color). And a 40" Philipps MVA screen. 
The bigger the screen is, the worse the sharpening looks.

What I don't understand is, why do people love videoish sharpening?

Because it is perceived as detail. Seeing 4k on a big screen is still a novelty. People are fascinated by it, like under a spell, or hypnotized. The sharpened image makes for a hyper real world, where there is more contrast then in the real world, rendering everything easier to recognise. Having this super vision may give the viewer an elevated sense of security and control.

People see contrast. More contrast makes discerning easy.

Only the smarter people recognise subtle nuance and detail. Lower IQ people only recognise easy to identify, contrasty, things.

Thank you for the question, it moved me to think

[deezid]

10 minutes ago, Ken Ross said:

And truth be told, guys like me and those that like the 'video look', don't fall in love with what we see as soft, heavily graded videos. It all depends on the look you're after and what you're trying to capture. Similarly I don't think I'd like HFR theatrical movies, because I've grown up with the 24fps filmic look. Yet for the things I shoot, I prefer that 'video look'. That doesn't make you right and me wrong or vice versa, it's just what we prefer. 

What surprises me more is the apparently close-minded attitude that some people have to these different looks...a true 'right & wrong' attitude. There just isn't a 'right & wrong', it's a preference.

BTW, I watch videos on my 27" 5K iMac as well as a 75" 4K LCD and 65" OLED. They look great on any of them.

So you prefer are picture full of sharpening halos and other (more pronounced) artifacts instead of real detail? Well my Galaxy S7 should suit you then, lol

[sam]

2 hours ago, jonpais said:

Maybe it's got to do with how they're viewing the videos? I use a 27" iMac, maybe it's not so bothersome on a 75" backlit OLED HDR television?

Looks as if you've unleashed your own "viewing setups" thread. :-)  

[jonpais]

2 minutes ago, sam said:

Looks as if you've unleashed your own "viewing setups" thread. :-)  

I thought you might enjoy that.  

5 minutes ago, Ken Ross said:

Wow, who knew? I feel so dumb, so inadequate, so naive.

On the GH5, you can turn sharpening down to -6, so there's still hope!

[webrunner5]

To me I would agree that 4k is Over the Top, what I like is 4k down scaled to 1080p. I think that is My sweet spot, with a little mix of film look in it. I am not into the turquoise skies, crushed blacks, film grain from hell stuff. I want to see buttery smooth stuff with good definition in it. Yeah 35mm movie film has that, but we can't afford that.

Hmm, I think I just described sort of a BMPCC Raw look I like so much. Oh well.

[jonpais]

9 hours ago, zmarty said:

I have the GH5 on preorder and I am checking YouTube often for sample videos.

I cannot figure out if the video below was already discussed, but it seems 10 bit video is way more noisy than 8 bit on the GH5, which I find unacceptable. And my opinion is that it cannot be because of the codec/compression, it's more than that.

I am looking at the video on a 4K screen but I am sure the problem is apparent on smaller resolutions too.

The original file (which is 8 bit) can be found here, it's linked in the description: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0YX2ibzpZ8VLWxiNHFFUkhLQTQ/view?usp=sharing&pageId=108428603654979960847

 

I don't know about you, but this guy could sell me any camera, I'd buy it cash money on the spot.

[deezid]

22 minutes ago, Ken Ross said:

See it's that close-minded attitude I'm talking about. Thanks for demonstrating that. To answer your question, no, when I watch, even on a 75" UHD TV, I am not watching a picture 'full of sharpening halos and other more pronounced artifacts'. If I did, I'd change my settings. Artifacts like these are clearly visible in scenes where tree limbs are set against a sky. Of course you know that seating distance, relative to screen size, plays a role in how much detail & artifacts you see.

But thanks for playing and you can keep your S7.  

Thanks for calling me close-minded.

I actually should be glad that almost nobody cares about producing filmic/organic looking video and should stop giving away any information how to do so.

People don't understand why they like filmic looking footage, but they pay when they see something not looking like being made with a smartphone, lol.

 

27 minutes ago, jonpais said:

I thought you might enjoy that.  

On the GH5, you can turn sharpening down to -6, so there's still hope!

-6 would be nice actually, since -5 still shows slight hints of oversharpening halos (no dealbreaker here, optical filters will take care of the rest). Not quite RED/ARRI/BM/SONY etc... like, but a bit better than the GH4 already.