GH5 focus excellence

[Emanuel]

1 hour ago, Ken Ross said:

LOL. I don't know who Ken Stone is either, but I guess he's a nice guy.

I scrubbed through the Max & Joe video quickly and lo & behold, Max came to the conclusion that leaving off the custom settings they got good results. Whod'a thunk.  Unfortunately the damage has already been done from Max's first video where nothing was in focus almost ever. It's very hard for a piece of equipment to overcome that kind of bad publicity. That's why I wasn't as kind toward Max as some of you guys, despite his good intentions. I found it very frustrating to watch that first test knowing he was wrong and knowing the damage it was doing.

You and me, Ken, I think you all know it... : ) On his newest test, the same here. Where are the different lenses? External recording tests? The whole range of settings? What the hell Joseph was going to do there? To be focus subject to the Max's GH5?

[Ken Ross]

46 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

Also Dave Dougdale which have even more subscribers acknowledged that there is something "wrong" with the AF and he is waiting on a firmware fix of the issue.

From what I've seen I must agree. Something isn't how its supposed to be. The tracker follows a face perfectly and still its not in focus... The tracker should stay with the focus.

Because Dave also used the wrong settings. What I'm simply saying is that although there are issues with some of the settings in the AF menu, if you use the settings that do work properly, then you'll have few issues and it will work as you'd expect contrast based AF to work. It doesn't take a genius to learn, in the first couple of minutes, that although face tracking tracks the face perfectly, its focus is very erratic on the face. Another mistake made by some of these guys, is expecting it to pick up the face 30' from the camera...it won't.

It becomes clear that some of these settings don't enhance the AF reliability, they detract from its effectiveness. But some of these guys just insist on using the settings that are least effective.

As I said, let them do what they do and I'll continue to use it in effective manner.

[SuperSet]

How does this end?

1. Camera stays as it is and everyone just goes MF or just uses touch focus. This is my guess given Panasonic's statement about '95% of reported issues are user error'.

2. Panasonic issues a fix. I would be surprised if this happens but Panasonic did leave an out with that last sentence about pledging to make improvements to the AF.

[Ken Ross]

45 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Laughing out loud! Shit.

Yeah I think Panny has some big troubles on their hand here with AF. They better fix this quick or this could get ugly. This thing reminds me of my Canon 1D mk III. It was so god damn complex you could never duplicate anything you did in the field. It had WAY too many options on AF, and that was the reason it sucked and it ended up like the GH5 is looking like. Too damn complex with all the settings it has. The 1dn mkII I had before it could AF on ANYTHING in a heartbeat. It had a very simple AF menu.

95% of the focusing problems with the 1D mkIII were user errors. But why make a camera that you can screw up AF so easy to accomplish LoL.

Yup, if it was me, I'd totally ditch the custom AF settings. Simply not needed and does nothing but add to the complexity and give the AF a reputation it doesn't have to have. These custom settings seem to attract some like there's no tomorrow. They grab on to them and won't let go, despite failure after failure. It's just amazing to watch. God forbid they try something as simple as turning the damn thing off and going with 1-area. Nooo, wouldn't want to do that.

Can't wait for the next 2 hour Max & Joe video to go over these again. 

2 minutes ago, SuperSet said:

How does this end?

1. Camera stays as it is and everyone just goes MF or just uses touch focus. This is my guess given Panasonic's statement about '95% is user error'.

2. Panasonic issues a fix. I would be surprised if this happens but Panasonic did leave an out with that last sentence about pledging to make improvements to the AF.

No, it ends when people understand that you can use AF with the 1-area setting. It works just fine, thank you. I'm not saying that Panasonic shouldn't refine the other areas of AF if they insist on keeping things like 'custom', but it works fine today if you use the right setting.

[webrunner5]

I don't have one, but how big is the focus area with 1-area. Just 1 in the center, or say a small cluster of say 9 you can move around like the G7 has?? I am pretty happy how well my Panny G7 does focus with the right lens on it naturally. My New 14-140 f3.5- 5.6 II has that DFD ability.

[Mattias Burling]

20 minutes ago, Ken Ross said:

Because Dave also used the wrong settings. What I'm simply saying is that although there are issues with some of the settings in the AF menu...

So you say its broken but its still his fault...?

Im sorry but I don't get it. Why dont you want all of it to work? If you are happy with it, why not just stay happy but let others try to push Panasonic to make it even better?

I just dont see what you gain from constantly ripping on people who wants an improvement of something. Personally I never use AF, ever. Hardly ever for stills. I dont even have the camera (neither does Dougdale, he turned it down until its fixed). Im 99% I will never buy it and I still hope Panasonic fixes it. Because everyone gains from it, including you Ken.

It sets a standard and pushes the entire industry.

[webrunner5]

4 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

So you say its broken but its still his fault...?

Im sorry but I don't get it. Why dont you want all of it to work? If you are happy with it, why not just stay happy but let others try to push Panasonic to make it even better?

I just dont see what you gain from constantly ripping on people who wants an improvement of something. Personally I never use AF, ever. Hardly ever for stills. I dont even have the camera (neither does Dougdale, he turned it down until its fixed). Im 99% I will never buy it and I still hope Panasonic fixes it. Because everyone gains from it, including you Ken.

It sets a standard and pushes the entire industry.

Yeah I have to admit why would you HAVE to use just one setting when it has many settings, to get AF to work sort of well? I am not buying a GH5 also. But I didn't buy the GH4 either.

[webrunner5]

3 hours ago, Davey said:

The heavy breathing at 5:22 is something I am familiar with. Try this with an A7Sii and 70-200 f4 with people moving in front of the lens as they try to get a cheap shot off with their Boots disposables.

Had to do the single area / half press shutter manoeuvre and even then only got half the isle shot in focus. About the same as this bloke when all said and done.

 

God that guy needs to buy a old ENG camera. They can focus on anything if you learn how to do it. It's called MF LoL. But B4 lenses are a hell of a lot easier to focus than DSLR lenses. They have a Long throw to them and the camera, lens, battery combo is heavy as hell, and that is what makes them work so well, They are steady. You learn how to swing, pan them, not point them. That is their secret.

[Davey]

Ken Stone is a FCPX instructor. Not sure if has a GH5.

[Piet Haag]

3 hours ago, jonpais said:

Is it like an experimental film or something?

Hahahah 

and a bit more hahahahaha 

and just for good measure as I picture the preview screening for the happy couple ... hahahahah 

[Ken Ross]

2 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

I don't have one, but how big is the focus area with 1-area. Just 1 in the center, or say a small cluster of say 9 you can move around like the G7 has?? I am pretty happy how well my Panny G7 does focus with the right lens on it naturally. My New 14-140 f3.5- 5.6 II has that DFD ability.

It's one area, but also adjustable.

1 hour ago, Mattias Burling said:

So you say its broken but its still his fault...?

Im sorry but I don't get it. Why dont you want all of it to work? If you are happy with it, why not just stay happy but let others try to push Panasonic to make it even better?

I just dont see what you gain from constantly ripping on people who wants an improvement of something. Personally I never use AF, ever. Hardly ever for stills. I dont even have the camera (neither does Dougdale, he turned it down until its fixed). Im 99% I will never buy it and I still hope Panasonic fixes it. Because everyone gains from it, including you Ken.

It sets a standard and pushes the entire industry.

I'm not 'constantly ripping' on anyone. Stop with the hyperbole & melodrama. I am simply suggesting, for the 100th time, that there are settings that DO work. If people insist on using settings that don't work, that's their prerogative, but that doesn't mean the AF can't be used successfully with other settings. I've tried to be very helpful to this community and others by sharing the things that do work.

Of course I'm all in favor of Panasonic improving the other areas, I never implied otherwise. When I say this setting or that setting doesn't work, does that imply I'm happy with that? No, it simply implies I've found other settings that DO work. I don't know how to make this any clearer, I really don't. 

But let's also be very honest Mattias, what drives me nuts are the myriad of videos, including Max's original, that left the clear implication that virtually nothing worked. If you're the least bit objective about this, you can't deny that.

Even in the last joint video, they kept using face detection. How many times do you need to try face detection to know it doesn't work in its current incarnation. They did the simulated wedding thing and focused on hands with face detection. It didn't work...I would never have guessed that. Central area? Nope, he didn't use it or if he did, I missed it.

[Fritz Pierre]

2 hours ago, Ken Ross said:

Even in the last joint video, they kept using face detection. How many times do you need to try face detection to know it doesn't work in its current incarnation. They did the simulated wedding thing and focused on hands with face detection. It didn't work...I would never have guessed that. Central area? Nope, he didn't use it or if he did, I missed it.

Because if they find something that works....bang....end of controversy, and then they have to go through finding the next thing to go on about...because that's how they make their money....perhaps the next innovation by Canon or Sony?...oh...for a second I forgot....they don't innovate...they wait for Panasonic to do that, and then they play catch up....at least Sony does...Canon does not even bother lol

[Shield3]

6 hours ago, Ken Ross said:

Shield, no editing tricks. The reason the focus did what it did at the end, was that I inadvertently hit the shutter release to stop the video instead of the movie record button. That forced a refocus. If you don't believe me, listen to the audio. You will hear a 'click' that only occurs when you use the shutter release to end a clip rather than the movie record button.

On the first video, were you toggling any buttons, like AF/AE or half shutter press?  At the end of the day can I throw this on a gimbal with your settings and NOT have to touch the camera (i.e. set it on continuous AF and let it do it's thing?)

[Ken Ross]

2 minutes ago, Shield3 said:

On the first video, were you toggling any buttons, like AF/AE or half shutter press?  At the end of the day can I throw this on a gimbal with your settings and NOT have to touch the camera (i.e. set it on continuous AF and let it do it's thing?)

No, nothing like that at all. Simple CAF with no intervention on my part. Again, I was trying to duplicate the outdoor shot that Max conducted in his first test when he went from a car fender to something further away. He also did a test from a bush to a sign. I did both tests in a similar manner with very different results. All I did was shut off custom AF and use 1-area. Ezpz.

When I'm actually shooting my own stuff, I will use AF lock when the subject warrants. I've done this with all my cameras, PDAF and contrast alike.

[Shield3]

2 minutes ago, Ken Ross said:

No, nothing like that at all. Simple CAF with no intervention on my part. Again, I was trying to duplicate the outdoor shot that Max conducted in his first test when he went from a car fender to something further away. He also did a test from a bush to a sign. I did both tests in a similar manner with very different results. All I did was shut off custom AF and use 1-area. Ezpz.

When I'm actually shooting my own stuff, I will use AF lock when the subject warrants. I've done this with all my cameras, PDAF and contrast alike.

Yes I do the same with my c100 II - I have assigned the handle custom button to toggle AF.  So pardon me if I've missed this, but have your or anyone else simply told Max and/or the Photo guy on Youtube what settings you used?

[Ken Ross]

1 hour ago, Fritz Pierre said:

Because if they find something that works....bang....end of controversy, and then they have to go through finding the next thing to go on about...because that's how they make their money....perhaps the next innovation by Canon or Sony?...oh...for a second I forgot....they don't innovate...they wait for Panasonic to do that, and then they play catch up....at least Sony does...Canon does not even bother lol

I think PhotoJoe had a real reason to get this to work, but he too used the wrong settings. He had asked me via a post on one of his videos, just prior to the meeting with Max, what settings I used because he was impressed with the results I got. I got his request too late and when I sent it on the website he requested, I'm not even sure it went through.

2 minutes ago, Shield3 said:

Yes I do the same with my c100 II - I have assigned the handle custom button to toggle AF.  So pardon me if I've missed this, but have your or anyone else simply told Max and/or the Photo guy on Youtube what settings you used?

I did on both PhotoJoe and Max's, but I think only PhotoJoe read it or saw it. But when he was on his way to Max, he couldn't find my post because of the way YouTube sorts them. That's when he requested I send them on his own website.

47 minutes ago, Jn- said:

Cinem5D have updated their GH5 review.  https://***URL not allowed***/panasonic-gh5-lab-review-update-clarification/

That was another case of initial bad press for the GH5 as the result of something that wasn't quite the fault of the GH5. But at least they were big enough to admit their error.

[jonpais]

It really does not seem to add up, at least in my opinion, that a half dozen or so reviewers whose work I respect, would purposely trash the GH5, or any other gear for that matter, just to increase viewership. In fact, several have already purchased one or more bodies already, and aside from the AF, they say it's a phenomenal camera. Not only that, but most of these channels earn money when viewers purchase gear through the links in their site. So you can accuse a dozen or more reputable reviewers of incompetence if you like, but I think unless you can prove that these reviewers are benefitting economically by sharing the results of their tests, please refrain from accusing them of having ulterior motives.

[Ken Ross]

1 hour ago, jonpais said:

It really does not seem to add up, at least in my opinion, that a half dozen or so reviewers whose work I respect, would purposely trash the GH5, or any other gear for that matter, just to increase viewership. In fact, several have already purchased one or more bodies already, and aside from the AF, they say it's a phenomenal camera. Not only that, but most of these channels earn money when viewers purchase gear through the links in their site. So you can accuse a dozen or more reputable reviewers of incompetence if you like, but I think unless you can prove that these reviewers are benefitting economically by sharing the results of their tests, please refrain from accusing them of having ulterior motives.

I never accused any reviewers of purposely trashing the GH5 and never even mentioned anything about viewership or hits on their websites. I have no idea why some of us owners have discovered the effectiveness of 1-area (it didn't take a brain surgeon to figure it out) and these reviewers have not. Now Panasonic has come out and agreed with us. So clearly we were correct and some of the reviewers missed it. Jon, if you or anyone can come up with a logical explanation for the oversight of these reviewers, I'm all ears.

I have been nothing but honest with this community. I've posted examples of my tests and posted additional tests at the request of members here. If that honesty and those efforts aren't appreciated, then I'm simply wasting my time and everyone else's.

[jonpais]

1 hour ago, Ken Ross said:

I never accused any reviewers of purposely trashing the GH5 and never even mentioned anything about viewership or hits on their websites. I have no idea why some of us owners have discovered the effectiveness of 1-area (it didn't take a brain surgeon to figure it out) and these reviewers have not. Now Panasonic has come out and agreed with us. So clearly we were correct and some of the reviewers missed it. Jon, if you or anyone can come up with a logical explanation for the oversight of these reviewers, I'm all ears.

I have been nothing but honest with this community. I've posted examples of my tests and posted additional tests at the request of members here. If that honesty and those efforts aren't appreciated, then I'm simply wasting my time and everyone else's.

I appreciate your contributions, I wasn't directing my comment at you. I don't recall you ever saying reviewers purposely reported poor AF results just in order to increase viewership. Max did however spend some 25 hours testing, and 1/2 dozen or more others whose reviews I respect also came to similar conclusions. Even Photo Joseph, a Panasonic luminary, could not get consistent results. Joseph and Max both seemed to agree that AF-C performed better at 60p with an external recorder, but I shoot 24p and have no desire to purchase an external recorder - a monitor though, for sure! ? And I find it baffling that the Vario 12-35mm f/2.8 v.1 performed better in their tests than v.2. I don't own the camera, I'm not taking sides, I really wish they would move on already. 

[Mattias Burling]

10 hours ago, Ken Ross said:

But let's also be very honest Mattias, what drives me nuts are the myriad of videos, including Max's original, that left the clear implication that virtually nothing worked. If you're the least bit objective about this, you can't deny that.

Even in the last joint video, they kept using face detection. How many times do you need to try face detection to know it doesn't work in its current incarnation. They did the simulated wedding thing and focused on hands with face detection. It didn't work...I would never have guessed that. Central area? Nope, he didn't use it or if he did, I missed it.

Here is where you loose me. The face detection is obviously broken. It is not working as it should. The camera tracks the face but doesn't adjust the focus.

I believe this is fixable. 

So if you ask me, every reviewer out there should use it. Again and again. To put heat on Panasonic so they fix it.

(Btw, center area is where the subject wont be for 70-90% of all shots. Thats probably the reason why people don't want to settle for it.)

8 hours ago, Fritz Pierre said:

Because if they find something that works....bang....end of controversy, and then they have to go through finding the next thing to go on about...because that's how they make their money....

They would make way more money if they only talked about the good things. Max's money comes from camera sales...