Anyone not that excited about the GH5?

[tugela]

3 hours ago, Trek of Joy said:

I have a hard time believing that one. A few hundred pixels out of 20 million, please. But what I would believe is the additional engineering required to have a competent PADF system while shooting stills and video was beyond the budget/time allowed for release, especially given the recent restructuring - they're trying to reel in costs in a sharply declining market. They've had years to figure this one out, the gap between Panny's AF and others will get wider as face detection, eye AF, and AF-c tracking get further refined.

The 4k/60p filmmaker market is minuscule compared to the general buying public - PADF on the GH5 would have tricked down to the volume models - which is the segment that needs it the most. In 2016 ILC sales were down another 12% to over 11m units, compacts continued to crater and shipped 12m units, for the first time in ages 2017 will see more ILC's shipped than compacts, of course due to phones. When soccer moms go to buy a "good camera" to move up from their iPhones and see the difference Canon's dual pixel AF makes compared to DFD as only one stays locked onto the subject walking around the store, its an easy decision. 

Personally, I haven't seen anything that constituted a "vast improvement" in IQ. Marginal yes, vast no. The current gen of m43 sensors has pretty much peaked IQ wise, until Sony goes BSI or the long rumored organic sees the light of day, there are no vast improvements to be made in m43 IQ world. Or any other for that matter, its always incremental.

The GH5 still looks like a great camera, if I didn't shoot 25k+ stills a year I would probably get one. But for me, DFD doesn't cut it. As always YMMV.

Amazing, I agree with others, a grading tutorial that demonstrates the steps you posted would be something I'd bookmark.

Canon's DPAF focusing time is 0.03s, while Sony's most recent systems focus in 0.05s. That is not so great a difference that a casual viewer could tell the difference, so your soccer moms would not react the way you think they would. They might choose a Canon, but DPAF would have nothing to do with it.

Don't underestimate the value of being able to shoot 4K in 60p either. It will result in smoother motion, something your soccer mom is going to value much more (since she is likely going to be shooting at small apertures anyway, and focusing speed is less of an issue).

[jonpais]

5 minutes ago, tugela said:

Canon's DPAF focusing time is 0.03s, while Sony's most recent systems focus in 0.05s. That is not so great a difference that a casual viewer could tell the difference, so your soccer moms would not react the way you think they would. They might choose a Canon, but DPAF would have nothing to do with it.

Don't underestimate the value of being able to shoot 4K in 60p either. It will result in smoother motion, something your soccer mom is going to value much more (since she is likely going to be shooting at small apertures anyway, and focusing speed is less of an issue).

I get what you're saying, but in this forum at least, are we really concerned about what the general public sees, or what soccer moms would notice? I know I'm not, or I would still be shooting video with my Canon Power Shot...

[mechanicalEYE]

7 hours ago, Shield3 said:

True, very true.  In fact the only reason I even started this thread was all the front page topics gushing over the GH5 and Andrew saying how Canon needs to get on the ball.  Canon is still #1 in the camera world, has excellent stills cameras and wonderful video AF - there's a reason you see them all over all pro sports venues.  Canon could release a camera with all the tech they have now and sell a billion of them - IE 80d body with a FF sensor, the EVF from the C300/C100 II, 305 M/bit codec, 4k60 and 1080p120.  You also know Canon sure as hell could make fast STM primes - their bread and butter are with stills photogs though who want the much faster USM focusing.

So you started this thread simply because you didn't like seeing Andrew "gush" over a camera he's waited for, received, has in hand, and realized he likes? It's a good thing Andrew's 'gushing' didn't start to ramp up until after he received it, and had some time to really check out.  Maybe it's because you're taking offense to his opinion on Canon's current status in the industry? I mean, it's his opinion... and I'd kinda expect Andrew to post his excitement, dislike, opinions for any camera/camera manufacturer he chooses... especially on the front page of a site he created. Protesting personal opinion's on camera specs and camera selection... is that it?  I dunno - carry on

[Stab]

The GH5 currently is worth it for one single reason alone. 4k at 50p / 60p. If you need it. And I do.

[Fritz Pierre]

12 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

It is a AG-AF100A. The last series they made. well not the last camera they made LoL. I really have no clue why the GH5, well it would not be called GH but, why the hell they did not go back to the AF100 form factor. Jesus it would be a dream camera. They are very well laid out, and for a guy my age, 70 in April, it works out damn well both the EVF, and the LCD.

As you can see you can See the body, and change the lens with ease. And you can buy the original AF100's for hell Ike 500 to 600 bucks. I got my AF100A as a new refurb for $996.54. Yeah it is Only 1080p but I have my G7 for 4k stuff and as you know they are pretty damn good for that.

I think the AF100 if for nothing else is a hell of a great teaching aide for learning how to set up Pro style cameras. This thing has 100 things you can change, and on paper none of it is really uses Auto. I mean it does AF native lenses, but I only have one of them I use. The rest are manual focus. I love how yo can use B4 lenses on them. Well you can on all the m4/3 in reality.

What I found that was pretty amazing stat was that the AF100 was the very first large sensor camera made that a person could actually afford to buy. The Sony FS100 came out soon after it.

 

Yeah...I really love the ergonomics of this camera....as you can see from my picture...building out to this kind of form factor was my goal...even if it does not match this, the large Camcorder format is still and always will be desirable...the GH5 is unique IMO though, in that you can handhold it in a small space, and get a shot that looks locked off (I'm of the personal style philosophy that you move the camera  as little as possible and if you do, with a dolly grip on a dolly)...that makes the GH5 a perfect B cam for me...I'm trying tp raise funding for a feature and would acquire a Varicam LT for that, with the GH5 as the perfect match. Anyway a follow up to the AF-100 would have been great!...perhaps the money just wasn't in it for Panasonic!

[webrunner5]

25 minutes ago, Fritz Pierre said:

Yeah...I really love the ergonomics of this camera....as you can see from my picture...building out to this kind of form factor was my goal...even if it does not match this, the large Camcorder format is still and always will be desirable...the GH5 is unique IMO though, in that you can handhold it in a small space, and get a shot that looks locked off (I'm of the personal style philosophy that you move the camera  as little as possible and if you do, with a dolly grip on a dolly)...that makes the GH5 a perfect B cam for me...I'm trying tp raise funding for a feature and would acquire a Varicam LT for that, with the GH5 as the perfect match. Anyway a follow up to the AF-100 would have been great!...perhaps the money just wasn't in it for Panasonic!

Well you have to remember that the original AF100 was basically 5000 bucks when new in 2010. They were into Sony Pro territory with that much money. Sony just has too much money, engineering talent to try and take away business from them. Not counting serious brand loyalty in their products. I mean they have been Sony has, the 8000 pound Gorilla in the video broadcast business. No one is even close! They have to be the first company you look at if you are buying new or upgrading.

Heck even now except for Arri on movie stuff, they don't hold any grip on Broadcasting, neither is Red a threat on that front, they still control damn near all of the Broadcast other than Panny in there with their Varicam, and I don't think that is doing as well as they had hoped. You just are not going to unseat Sony for Video. They have a damn proud proven record and as a buyer, producer in TV, even hobbyist you know they are not going away. And they always come up with some killer ass upgrade path that is the Carrot from hell. Look at the F35, F65, Jesus that was some, and still is, amazing cameras.

They are God when it comes to video. They have amazing talent at the engineering part of it. They ARE driven. You can't loose with them if you have the bucks, and it takes Big bucks, in the long run.

Look at the Sony A7s, we take it for granted now, but it was, and still is, the camera from hell for low light. It is almost like a miracle. And hell what will the A7s mkIII be. Grab your ass probably.

[Fritz Pierre]

5 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Well you have to remember that the original AF100 was basically 5000 bucks when new in 2010. They were into Sony Pro territory with that much money. Sony just has too much money, engineering talent to try and take away business from them. Not counting serious brand loyalty in their products. I mean they have been Sony has, the 8000 pound Gorilla in the video broadcast business. No one is even close! They have to be the first company you look at if you are buying new or upgrading.

Heck even now except for Arri on movie stuff, they don't hold any grip on Broadcasting, neither is Red a threat on that front, they still control damn near all of the Broadcast other than Panny in there with their Varicam, and I don't think that is doing as well as they had hoped. You just are not going to unseat Sony for Video. They have a damn proud proven record and as a buyer, producer in TV, even hobbyist you know they are not going away. And they always come up with some killer ass upgrade path that is the Carrot from hell. Look at the F35, F65, Jesus that was some, and still is, amazing cameras.

They are God when it comes to video. They have amazing talent at the engineering part of it. They ARE driven. You can't loose with them if you have the bucks, and it takes Big bucks, in the long run.

Yes...I seriously considered an F35...to my eye the most beautiful image out there!...but in the end I feared the "death by a thousand cuts" scenario, and as I live in an area where you don't just ship your gear in for service, plus the replacement parts for the F35 were still those that came from a nearly $200,000 camera when new, I chickened out...plus I love panasonic cameras...the color....the reliability and even in their hybrids, the form factor compared to other DSLR cameras...Best thing in all of this, no shortage of cameras to keep the subjectivity of individuals satisfied!...we have long ago run out of excuses to not shoot beautiful stuff...what a terrifying state of affairs!

[webrunner5]

1 hour ago, Fritz Pierre said:

Yes...I seriously considered an F35...to my eye the most beautiful image out there!...but in the end I feared the "death by a thousand cuts" scenario, and as I live in an area where you don't just ship your gear in for service, plus the replacement parts for the F35 were still those that came from a nearly $200,000 camera when new, I chickened out...plus I love panasonic cameras...the color....the reliability and even in their hybrids, the form factor compared to other DSLR cameras...Best thing in all of this, no shortage of cameras to keep the subjectivity of individuals satisfied!...we have long ago run out of excuses to not shoot beautiful stuff...what a terrifying state of affairs!

Yeah I was thinking how hard it is to take good stuff with my Af100A, and in reality how easy it is to take stuff with my Panny GH3 I had or the Panny G7 I still have. They work right out of the box, on Auto, nearly producing perfect stuff if you just need to get what you Have to get..

Yes there is no excuse in this day and age to blame a camera. Or even Have to have a high dollar one. It really rest on the shoulders of the users skill set, not the limitation of the cameras anymore. And with editing software now, with a million different LuTs, you can pretty much make anything look like anything in a sense.

[BTM_Pix]

I think the buzz around it is a good thing as it's making people who've got one get excited and get out there shooting and making the people who haven't got one take a good look at what they HAVE got and by and large think "I can live with what I've got. I'll buy some lights instead" 

Everyone wins like that.

With regard to the AF100, if Panasonic refresh the HVX200 (which is a GH4 with a lens) with the GH5 sensor at NAB then it will have some serious attention for anyone with rig and jig fatigue 

[noone]

Not any more it isn't.

The (original) A7s will still do me but the Red Helium 8k s35 is now the low light king.

https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Red-Helium-8K-S35-versus-Sony-A7S-II-versus-Sony-A7S___1110_1047_949

I just watched an episode of  Planet Earth ii last night and it is interesting that the BBC used an A7s for that series in part as well as a modified Red camera.       My guess is they will still use a small low light camera for forthcoming shows but for other low light, why wouldn't you use the latest greatest (budget permitting).

3 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

Look at the Sony A7s, we take it for granted now, but it was, and still is, the camera from hell for low light. It is almost like a miracle. And hell what will the A7s mkIII be. Grab your ass probably

 

[webrunner5]

55 minutes ago, noone said:

Not any more it isn't.

The (original) A7s will still do me but the Red Helium 8k s35 is now the low light king.

https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Red-Helium-8K-S35-versus-Sony-A7S-II-versus-Sony-A7S___1110_1047_949

I just watched an episode of  Planet Earth ii last night and it is interesting that the BBC used an A7s for that series in part as well as a modified Red camera.       My guess is they will still use a small low light camera for forthcoming shows but for other low light, why wouldn't you use the latest greatest (budget permitting).

 

Wow that Red is almost off the chart on all their stats! They will have to make a bigger, longer chart LoL. Jesus crazy good, but for like nearly 50k or more I guess it ought too. That ought to help Red with getting back into favor with the big boy movie shooters. Most have just gone to the Arri Alexa XL.

Red was just giving DoP's new Reds to shoot with, so hell yes you will use them. But now I think they are even paying for the Arri's to use because they are hands down the most Filmic looking. Arri has their stuff together on that.

But Wow 8k, they will be able to do a lot of VFX on the new Red. Arri has some catching up to do I guess now.. They are just barely producing 4k.

Hard to believe that a tiny company like Red can come out with so much crazy ass good stuff. I had a original Red One on order years ago, deposit and all,  they were like 5 grand if you made early down payment, and I just gave up on it. They shit around for nearly 2 years before they did have one shipping. The project I had set up for it faded into the sunset. My daughter and I have it all planed script and all. She was in California and had access to all we needed. She has a degree in creative writing. She still lives there. But that was a long time ago. You just have to move along. She still has a lot of my old Sony ENG cameras, tripods, recorders from what I had back in the day. I used to own a ton of stuff years ago.

[Ken Ross]

1 hour ago, noone said:

Not any more it isn't.

The (original) A7s will still do me but the Red Helium 8k s35 is now the low light king.

https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Red-Helium-8K-S35-versus-Sony-A7S-II-versus-Sony-A7S___1110_1047_949

I just watched an episode of  Planet Earth ii last night and it is interesting that the BBC used an A7s for that series in part as well as a modified Red camera.       My guess is they will still use a small low light camera for forthcoming shows but for other low light, why wouldn't you use the latest greatest (budget permitting).

 

Actually most of the footage was shot on Red Epic Dragons @6K resolution. The series was broadcast (at least on Directv) in 4K and the Sony that was used was the A7Sii because of its 4K capabiliy. It does not appear the original A7S was used at all. The A7Sii was used for some of the 4K low light scenes. Interestingly they also used GoPro-style cameras.

[noone]

2 hours ago, Ken Ross said:

Actually most of the footage was shot on Red Epic Dragons @6K resolution. The series was broadcast (at least on Directv) in 4K and the Sony that was used was the A7Sii because of its 4K capabiliy. It does not appear the original A7S was used at all. The A7Sii was used for some of the 4K low light scenes. Interestingly they also used GoPro-style cameras.

I wasn't sure which A7s was used.

The first articles I saw only had A7s but the later ones say A7sii.        I was thinking it might have been the first version as I thought this was filmed before the ii was available.

Doesn't matter what they used, I certainly couldn't have shot it regardless of what camera I used.

The A7s/A7sii stuff was really low light stuff.      Wasn't in the episode I saw last night (the modified Red was).  

A brilliant series though and the future looks very bright for this sort of show from all sorts of makers.

[Kisaha]

https://www.wired.com/2017/03/crazy-new-camera-tech-made-planet-earth-2-possible/

The first Planet Earth was more impressive at the time, both technically and artistically (in my opinion).

Of, course #2 is a must see also. There are "Planet Earth 2 playlists", pretty cool music from Radio 1 with -mostly- aerial shots from the production.

They have a new one out, with Robot animals with eye-cameras! https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/dec/31/bbc-robot-creatures-spy-secret-lives-animals-wildlife-series  (there are some pictures of the robots on the internet, spooky!)

and the Blue Planet II is coming this year!

[Ken Ross]

3 hours ago, noone said:

I wasn't sure which A7s was used.

The first articles I saw only had A7s but the later ones say A7sii.        I was thinking it might have been the first version as I thought this was filmed before the ii was available.

Doesn't matter what they used, I certainly couldn't have shot it regardless of what camera I used.

The A7s/A7sii stuff was really low light stuff.      Wasn't in the episode I saw last night (the modified Red was).  

A brilliant series though and the future looks very bright for this sort of show from all sorts of makers.

I've been watching it in 4K on DIRECTV. Their camera work is absolutely stunning. How they got some of the shots they did, is truly amazing. 

An incredibly enjoyable series. 

[Trek of Joy]

On 3/29/2017 at 1:11 PM, tugela said:

Canon's DPAF focusing time is 0.03s, while Sony's most recent systems focus in 0.05s. That is not so great a difference that a casual viewer could tell the difference, so your soccer moms would not react the way you think they would. They might choose a Canon, but DPAF would have nothing to do with it.

Don't underestimate the value of being able to shoot 4K in 60p either. It will result in smoother motion, something your soccer mom is going to value much more (since she is likely going to be shooting at small apertures anyway, and focusing speed is less of an issue).

You missed my point completely. Its not about the minuscule difference in speed/acquisition times, its about following your subject with a simple tap on the screen - which Canon DPAF is superior to everything else and light years ahead of Panasonic. No casual photographer is shooting high bitrate video of birthday parties and school plays in 4k60p on a $2000 body, SMH...

Notice how DPAF is on all volume selling Canon bodies? This is where the gap is the widest - and where the most units are being moved - and where Panasonic is so far behind. There's hope since IBIS was first introduced on the lower end models, but they're still far behind the competition and the gap grows wider with every Dpreview puff piece showing how easy it is to focus on moving subjects with a Canon body. 

Cheers

[tweak]

If it were the same price in AUS as the GH4 was I'd be somewhat excited. But at more than 3x the price I paid for my GH4 new I'm not really excited at all, it's way out of my budget.

[Kubrickian]

The only GH5 video I've seen so far that I've really liked is James Miller's. All that it took was a Zeiss Otus and a 4k external recorder to accomplish a pristine baked-in-LUT downscale of 4k to 1080p. Every other test video simply doesn't have colors I like. The film look isn't there. If you told me all of it was shot with a GH4 I'd believe you. 

[tugela]

15 hours ago, Trek of Joy said:

You missed my point completely. Its not about the minuscule difference in speed/acquisition times, its about following your subject with a simple tap on the screen - which Canon DPAF is superior to everything else and light years ahead of Panasonic. No casual photographer is shooting high bitrate video of birthday parties and school plays in 4k60p on a $2000 body, SMH...

Notice how DPAF is on all volume selling Canon bodies? This is where the gap is the widest - and where the most units are being moved - and where Panasonic is so far behind. There's hope since IBIS was first introduced on the lower end models, but they're still far behind the competition and the gap grows wider with every Dpreview puff piece showing how easy it is to focus on moving subjects with a Canon body. 

Cheers

And you missed my point. With the inherent focusing speeds available with current cameras, the bottleneck actually lies with the lenses, not the cameras themselves.

Even with multiple focusing points available, a holistic focusing solution is going to be strongly dependent on the computational capabilities of the camera, and in that respect Panasonic are the leaders. Even Sony are behind them in that respect. Canon on the other hand are a distant last, beaten by Nikon and everyone else. Their processors are primitive. Canon cameras might track well on their DSLR models, but those use relatively few data points hardwired on the mirror system, not DPAF.

[fuzzynormal]

I'm just grateful we're offered such imaging products that are so cheap and competent. 

Its really kind of nuts --and I'm still amazed this kind of gear (across the entire segment) does what it does. 

I think I might go make a movie with it or something...