How High An ISO Will You Go On Your GH5???

[Mark Romero]

After discovering that gravity, concrete and a faulty ladder are bad for an a6300 (not to mention for an ankle) I am in need of a new camera.

So of course I am looking at the GH5 because... well... it's a GH5. Or getting an a6500

For those with a GH5, how high of an ISO will you go before you really start NEEDING noise reduction software / plugins?

How high will you go if you DO use plugins / NR software?

And is the GH5 a good camera if you want to do MINIMAL post processing? I know that the ability to record in 10-bit is great for grading. But what if you want to avoid grading (but need to do color correction because no one nails white balance in camera... especially if you will be dealing with a lot of mixed lighting like tungsten, daylight, and fluorescent all in the same shot)

I would be using it fro real estate videos and I need something quick, easy to use, good dynamic range, good stabilization (will be on my Zhiyun crane), and decent enough HIGH ISO performance.

The thing is, I will only be getting about $300 for a finished two-minute video. So I can't spend hours grading it / color correcting / stabilizing etc. I need something that is going to require minimal massaging.

Thanks in advance.

[PannySVHS]

 

Hallo Mark, that is a reasonable among other questions. High ISO in low light, shooting at 1600 Iso without any problems at all. I shot it at 8bit 420 HD, very gradeable footage and it´s an easy to grade camera. Shoot it at Natural profile with contrast at 0, noise reduction -5, sharpnes -5!!!, color -2.

HD is already very high resolving.

So the smallest mode of this camera is already delivering awesome and quick results. Try it out. If it don´t fit you after testing, bring it back to the store.

I´d say, it´s the perfect camera for your needs, the very best, durable, great battery life, quick results in REC709, IBIS, great color out of the box, if you

use White Balance. It´s a winner. No, I´m not working for Panasonic. I would love to though

 

[DBounce]

1600 is my max, 95% of the time... 3200 in a pinch. Nothing higher though.

[PannySVHS]

6 minutes ago, DBounce said:

1600 is my max, 95% of the time... 3200 in a pinch. Nothing higher though.

I second that.

[hyalinejim]

For me 3200 is OK if it's well exposed. After that I'd be looking at Neat Video.

VLog gives max dynamic range. Next best is Like709, according to Paul Leeming. 

[aldolega]

Remember that you don't have to shoot in V-Log, or Cine-D, or whatever and then laboriously grade it to perfection. There are plenty of other profiles and controls to use to get a good SOOC look. 

The catch there will be that you're usually sacrificing a bit of DR with those profiles (and DR is one of the a6500's strengths), but people seem to be getting good DR with the Like709 profile. 

Or use the Leeming LUT workflow, which couldn't really be simpler (set camera to recommended settings, shoot, drop LUT on the files in your NLE). He has LUTs for V-Log so this might be a simple way to get the max DR of the camera with no added effort in post.

If you typically have to do a lot of WB corrections I would definitely want to have 10bit just for that.

The only wins I see for the Sony would be a small edge in DR, lowlight performance, and photo quality. But if the GH5 is good enough for you in those categories, I think all of its other benefits make it the clear choice really.

[Mark Romero]

Thank you, Everyone, who has chimed in.

I am just going to have to do some tests and make sure that I can get away with ISO 1600. I know that since the GH5 is m43 while the a6500 is APS-C, and that in real estate I WANTE more depth of field, I can use a larger aperture and still get the same DOF. So in thery, I could shoot at f/5.6 and ISO 1600 whereas with the a6500 I would have to shoot at f.8 and ISO 3200 to get the same DOF.

I will look into the Leeming LUTs. 

Another question if I may:

Now that you know my needs, Is there anything else by Panasonic (or someone else) that might work that costs LESS than the GH5?

Or will I need 10-bit color if I do have to work a lot in mixed lighting?

I don't specifically think I will need 4K 60fps, although i might WANT it. I definitely need clean 60fps 1080p though.

I guess the cost of the GH5 is the price you pay for getting something that is "future proof" (well, at least as future proof as can be in today's world).

[scotchtape]

Actually I own both GH5 and A6500.  I do some real estate.  Depending on what I was shooting the A6500 wouldn't be a bad choice as the 4K is definitely sharper and it has more DR.

 

I use the GH5 a lot because the people I work with really like the stuff coming off of it and use the 60P often.  Also as a general camera it's been great (interviews, no recording limits or over heating etc but trash af-c and you have to work for shallow DOF).

 

BUT, if I was only doing 4K 24p real estate stuff with quick takes (no overheat worries) the A6500 is not a bad option.

 

Anyways you can't go wrong with GH5.  PS if you are shooting low end RE... really none of the clients care, and can't afford to at that price point.

[Fritz Pierre]

1600 is safe but well exposed 3200 will work for a must get shot!...for shooting fast the GH5 is the ideal camera, but it takes getting up to speed with...I would stay away from Vlog at high ISO and shoot standard, Like709 or CineD...a problem that might occur for you if you shot in Vlog is that even the preview luts in the LCD are quite low contrast, so if a client was looking at what you were shooting on the LCD they'd get the wrong impression...the 1st 2 profiles would be no post and CineD a dropped LUT and perhaps a slight contrast adjustment....all very ready out of camera looks. Personally I like the results hooting in 4K and downscaling to 1080, or however you deliver the content.

[apekkpul]

14 hours ago, DBounce said:

1600 is my max, 95% of the time... 3200 in a pinch. Nothing higher though.

Same here. I don't have NeatVideo and After Effects is slow; 3200 with NR=0 looks decent to me.

[Vesku]

GH5 has finally auto iso limiter for video. It prevents GH5 using very high auto iso. It should still work with finer steps. It is now 1600 or 3200 but 2000 is not possible. I usually use upper limit iso1600.

Is the NR other than -5 making image soft and ugly like in GH4?

[JordanWright]

Yeah I would prefer not to go above 1600 (3200 at a push) but with a Speedbooster and Sigma 18-35, the lowlight is actually very good

[Damphousse]

12 hours ago, Mark Romero said:

I am just going to have to do some tests and make sure that I can get away with ISO 1600. I know that since the GH5 is m43 while the a6500 is APS-C, and that in real estate I WANTE more depth of field, I can use a larger aperture and still get the same DOF. So in thery, I could shoot at f/5.6 and ISO 1600 whereas with the a6500 I would have to shoot at f.8 and ISO 3200 to get the same DOF.

 

No.

In real estate you also want to go wide in you field of view.  Going from APS-C to m43 makes no sense if you are taking pictures of cramped interiors.  You would want to go to full frame and squeeze more real estate in with optics that distort less.  A cheap extremely low distortion 50mm lens is going to have a field of view of a 100mm lens on m43.  Once you start adding in things like speedboosters or wider and wider lenses distortion creeps in and is evident with all the straight lines in interiors.

Not saying you can't use something smaller than FF but physics is clearly on the side of FF.

The Panasonic 12-35 ii is expensive but the GH5 corrects the distortion in camera.  Could be a nice way to "cheat".

[Mark Romero]

6 hours ago, Damphousse said:

No.

In real estate you also want to go wide in you field of view.  Going from APS-C to m43 makes no sense if you are taking pictures of cramped interiors.  You would want to go to full frame and squeeze more real estate in with optics that distort less.  A cheap extremely low distortion 50mm lens is going to have a field of view of a 100mm lens on m43.  Once you start adding in things like speedboosters or wider and wider lenses distortion creeps in and is evident with all the straight lines in interiors.

Not saying you can't use something smaller than FF but physics is clearly on the side of FF.

The Panasonic 12-35 ii is expensive but the GH5 corrects the distortion in camera.  Could be a nice way to "cheat".

True. With my current setup I use my Sony 10-18 f/4 and it is certainly wide enough (both for videos and stills).

I generally shoot RE interior video at around 20 to 24mm full frame equivalent, so for m43 format I would need (apparently) somewhere around 10 to 12mm lens.

[scotchtape]

Every system has uwa.  You can use 7-14mm Panasonic or Olympus ...

[Mark Romero]

On 9/4/2017 at 4:19 PM, scotchtape said:

Every system has uwa.  You can use 7-14mm Panasonic or Olympus ...

Yes, that is what I thought. I was pretty sure that Panasonic had an UWA lens.

[eleison]

On 9/4/2017 at 10:19 AM, Damphousse said:

In real estate you also want to go wide in you field of view.  Going from APS-C to m43 makes no sense if you are taking pictures of cramped interiors.  You would want to go to full frame and squeeze more real estate in with optics that distort less.  A cheap extremely low distortion 50mm lens is going to have a field of view of a 100mm lens on m43.  Once you start adding in things like speedboosters or wider and wider lenses distortion creeps in and is evident with all the straight lines in interiors.

Not saying you can't use something smaller than FF but physics is clearly on the side of FF.

The Panasonic 12-35 ii is expensive but the GH5 corrects the distortion in camera.  Could be a nice way to "cheat".

Tell us how it goes.  I think the a6500 would be a better fit if you plan on using natural lighting -- especially for the outdoor landscape videos of a house ("curb appeal", sunset shots, places where lighting cannot be controlled, etc... ???).  After all, the general consensus is that low light ability of the a6500 is very, very good (some people have even tried to compare it to the a7sii).  You will be able leverage that into getting a larger dof.  I think if you use a speed booster for the gh5, than it might be parity.. but then it's an extra cost and adds complexity... and perhaps, as mention above, there maybe lens distortion..

hahah, yeah I agree with damphousse, the best solution, IMHO is full frame...  Time is money and sometimes you just cannot wait for that perfect lighting (you have a schedule.. other houses to visit, etc.).  Take the video and leave.  You don't want to wait for when the sun is up or going to your car to get lights, setup lights, etc...

[sina_html]

I own a GH5 and work alongside friends who use A7S and if a6300 image and dynamic range is anywhere near the original A7s then I think going from a6300 to GH5 you will feel a little disappointed in amount of noise and DR.

I dont feel comfortable going above iso 800 and 1600, specially when my footage is compared to A7S, in iso 1600 and 1300 you really dont want to under expose and then you may need to pull down shadows in post to hide some noise. low contrast looks really dont work for me in those high iso settings.

It is always nice to have a million stops of DR but it has never been a deal breaker for me, 10, 11, 12 stops are a lot and u can always work around limited DR.

In any other aspect, gh5 is a great professional tool. you get great IBIS, good and bright rotating display, great battery life, very nice slow motion and minimal rolling shutter, and 1080p image is much better than a6300. 

If 1 or 2 stops of higher iso performance and an stop of DR is more important to you than rolling shutter, reliability (battery, heat, dual memory, etc..) and ergonomic aspects of the camera, then why not stay with Sony?

[Mark Romero]

On 9/7/2017 at 5:39 AM, sina_html said:

I own a GH5 and work alongside friends who use A7S and if a6300 image and dynamic range is anywhere near the original A7s then I think going from a6300 to GH5 you will feel a little disappointed in amount of noise and DR.

I dont feel comfortable going above iso 800 and 1600, specially when my footage is compared to A7S, in iso 1600 and 1300 you really dont want to under expose and then you may need to pull down shadows in post to hide some noise. low contrast looks really dont work for me in those high iso settings.

It is always nice to have a million stops of DR but it has never been a deal breaker for me, 10, 11, 12 stops are a lot and u can always work around limited DR.

In any other aspect, gh5 is a great professional tool. you get great IBIS, good and bright rotating display, great battery life, very nice slow motion and minimal rolling shutter, and 1080p image is much better than a6300. 

If 1 or 2 stops of higher iso performance and an stop of DR is more important to you than rolling shutter, reliability (battery, heat, dual memory, etc..) and ergonomic aspects of the camera, then why not stay with Sony?

Thanks for posting this a while back. Sorry I didn't see it earlier.

I do appreciate your input.

As for your final question:

If 1 or 2 stops of higher iso performance and an stop of DR is more important to you than rolling shutter, reliability (battery, heat, dual memory, etc..) and ergonomic aspects of the camera, then why not stay with Sony?

It's not quite that simple. Obviously, the GH5 seems to shine in many areas that the a6300 / a6500 is quirky. The sony is a frustrating camera. But it also works excellently as  a STILLS camera. 

So that is wwat I REALLY want; a camera with better high ISO and a bit more DR and great AF and great stills AND doesn't suffer from RS and overheating and terrible ergonomics.

Funny thing about the battery: My D750 gets just as many shots in LiveView as my a6300 did. I have two different Nikon batteries for my D750 and I swear that they run out of juice just as soon (if not sooner) that my a6300 would.

[sina_html]

On 9/14/2017 at 3:33 AM, Mark Romero said:

So that is wwat I REALLY want; a camera with better high ISO and a bit more DR and great AF and great stills AND doesn't suffer from RS and overheating and terrible ergonomics.

I think all of us are looking for such a dream camera