Panasonic GH5S 4K / 240fps low light monster

[Nathan Gabriel]

4 hours ago, jonpais said:

Dynamic range, low light sensitivity and other cool stuff. Based on what I’ve seen so far, I wouldn’t be purchasing the GH5s for extra dynamic range. Sorry if this has already been posted. 

 

This hasn't been posted yet, so thanks! 

 

I've been a bit surprised by the reaction to the GH5s. If priced the same I would definitely prefer the better low light performance in the gh5s to the ibis in the gh5. But I'm a bit more inspired by dogme 95 shooting than event photography. Still I'd imagine that if you're shooting a concert it's easier to stabalize your camera than it is to control lighting.

[IronFilm]

7 hours ago, jonpais said:

And shooting between f/4-5.6 is like shooting at f/11-16 in full frame terms

Think about it in S35 terms not FF.

Then consider maybe this is with a focal reducer.

F4 then? That is a great F stop to shoot with! Fantastic.

 

7 hours ago, jonpais said:

As far as lighting goes, I have to give him credit just for mentioning it. But using smaller, cheaper LEDs is the very last thing you want to do, even if your camera is clean as a whistle at ISO 50,000. Because very small light sources produce unpleasant light. And good LEDs are dirt cheap nowadays. For shooting interviews or beauty shots anyway. Not saying small lights don’t have their uses. I don’t know, much of his reasoning seems to be based on saving money, but anyone investing in a $2,500 camera should be prepared to purchase the best lenses available as well as good lights, microphones, etc. Why buy the most expensive m4/3 camera to date and skimp out on the essentials?

If the Varicam LT (which is a massively more expensive camera) can have a huge impact on the lighting setups and lighting budgets, because of its dual ISO, then you can bet your bottom dollar there is truth in this statement for the GH5S too!

 

 

3 hours ago, Mmmbeats said:

Everybody prefers the quality of primes.  I shoot almost exclusively on them.  But that's not the only consideration.  When you're filming actuality that's changing fast in front of you, you just can't afford to faff around changing lenses.  That's where a good quality (and yes, that does mean pricey) zoom wins out.  Every time.

Zooms are important for scripted shoots too.

What happens if the director/producer throws 15 pages across four locations in a 10hr day at you? You'll want a zoom!

 

 

5 hours ago, ade towell said:

And that is a big deal for many - that the GH5s retains the 12 stops of DR at iso 2500 whereas by then the GH5 has dropped to about 9.5 stops

BINGO! EXACTLY

It not just only about how clean the image is, if the image is clean enough anyway.

 

 

[jonpais]

10 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

Hell I don't even have a TV or Monitor that has HDR or a camera that shoots it! And I doubt  not alone on here, and is probably the reason of not much interest.

If your camera shoots LOG or RAW, you can edit and grade it for HDR delivery

[DBounce]

8 hours ago, Nathan Gabriel said:

This hasn't been posted yet, so thanks! 

 

I've been a bit surprised by the reaction to the GH5s. If priced the same I would definitely prefer the better low light performance in the gh5s to the ibis in the gh5. But I'm a bit more inspired by dogme 95 shooting than event photography. Still I'd imagine that if you're shooting a concert it's easier to stabalize your camera than it is to control lighting.

I just don’t get it... I have the GH5 and I was happy to learn about the GH5S. Pre-ordered immediately. Who doesn’t like options. No one is forced to buy this camera. Honesty won’t miss IBIS. A gimbal is a better solution.

[jonpais]

I’m all about options - other cameras with great low light performance, IBIS and blazing fast autofocus with no hunting also exist. What good is lowlight ability if your camera’s af keeps pulsing?  Concerning gimbals, in conjunction with IBIS, it has been shown time and again to be superior to no IBIS, at least on single-handed gimbals. At $2500, the GH5s is already $700 USD more dear than what I paid for my GH5 (40% more expensive!) and loses one of the camera’s most beloved features. A few of the camera’s quirks aside, I find Andrew makes a compelling case for the a7rIII over the GH5*.

[Mattias Burling]

I haven't tested the new gadget that brings AF for manual focus lenses on gimbals but if it works out the need for the AF might go down.

[ntblowz]

4 hours ago, jonpais said:

At $2500, the GH5s is already $700 USD more dear than what I paid for my GH5 (40% more expensive!) and loses one of the camera’s most beloved features. A few of the camera’s quirks aside, I find Andrew makes a compelling case for the a7rIII over the GH5*.

Well some are able to get lower price than that RRP , to them the difference is much less.

 

for ultra wide angle I kind prefer no IS on gimbal, it makes weird warp effect.

[ade towell]

5 hours ago, jonpais said:

I’m all about options - other cameras with great low light performance, IBIS and blazing fast autofocus with no hunting also exist. What good is lowlight ability if your camera’s af keeps pulsing?  Concerning gimbals, in conjunction with IBIS, it has been shown time and again to be superior to no IBIS, at least on single-handed gimbals. At $2500, the GH5s is already $700 USD more dear than what I paid for my GH5 (40% more expensive!) and loses one of the camera’s most beloved features. A few of the camera’s quirks aside, I find Andrew makes a compelling case for the a7rIII over the GH5*.

Yeah we get it - your needs are different to others, isn't choice a great thing, move on, keep your camera and be happy instead of trying to think up other spurious reasons why not to get this one. Life can be simple...

[Dude_ger]

ade towell- exactly!

There are pros and cons about the ibis. But one thing to consider- no actual one hand gimbal works without ibis while running. You always get jitter. So if you don t use a lens stabilisation with the gh5s, this is a thing to think about.

[Robin Billingham]

@Trek of Joy

Yes its within the mft image circle. But normally when cropping to 16×9 you are not using thr full image circle of the mount. Only an over sized sensor allows this. I guess to put it simply. A 25mm lens on a gh5 will match a 50mm on a7sii in 16×9 mode on each camera (2× crop) but the same 25mm lens on 16×9 mode on a gh5s will be a bit wider than the 50mm on a a7sii... There for less than a 2x crop.

25mm on a gh5s will be wider than 25mm on gh5 (when using 16×9 and 17×9) so the crop cant be 2x on both 

[Waynes]

Hi Guys.  I've been reading a bit of the end part of this topic about stops.  I was actually out looking for 16 stop camera heads and this popped up on Google search.  16 stops, if only, but Panasonic pricing I'd rather that for $500 than paying an extra $500 on-top of the gh5.

From years ago, the Andromeda recorder project.  Jaun the emgineer found recording at a higher bit depth revealed extra dynamic range.  The 8 bit recordings were simply clipped version of 10 bit, I think.  But of course, if you are spreading the same dynamic range between your first and last values between one bit range and the next, than you are not going to get extra, as I think was indicated earlier.  However, as so much is noise, how does that noise hold out in bright scenes?  You can shift the placement of dynamic range to the highlights.  As indicated, lower noise may have revealed more stops, but was the gh5's old figure ussable stops, or including noise?  If ussable, then you would have more over 12 stops.  But what is the stops really?

New sensors.  The Sony handycams have a nice creamy smooth image late last year.  Without looking into tests, I think it is likely  from extra latitude like the Red Helium technology has.  Sony and Aptina did a cross license deal years ago on all their sensor technologies, so Sony could get hold of their high-speed low heat sensor technology.  I have been watching Red and Sony performance advances.  I think Red derives from the Aptina camp.  The new Panasonic sensor, is it a Sony derived technology?

Does this camera have a HDR video mode?  HDR video modes can give a few extra quality stops according to Red.

You categorically don't need a HDR screen to benefit from expanded latitude capture.  HDR screens are just to render the scene with more visual range.  Without one, you can still see a more expanded natural look on an normal screen.  But as you go beyond 16.5 stops the footage can look more murky without a screen with high enough dynamic range.

There are car cameras out there with 20 or more stops HDR video capture.

I wonder if there will be 16 stops 4k camera heads out there this year?

 

[Robert Collins]

On 1/18/2018 at 3:01 AM, Nathan Gabriel said:

I've been a bit surprised by the reaction to the GH5s. If priced the same I would definitely prefer the better low light performance in the gh5s to the ibis in the gh5. But I'm a bit more inspired by dogme 95 shooting than event photography. Still I'd imagine that if you're shooting a concert it's easier to stabalize your camera than it is to control lighting.

Is the choice that stark? I mean if the GH5S had ibis that you could turn on or off, would it really have lost that much of its low light ability?

I come from the stills side that is getting into video (I think there are quite a few of us.) When I think GH5, I think stellar stabilization (as well as quite a lot else), and crappy autofocus. It seems pretty heroic to come out with a more expensive camera with crappy autofocus and missing the stellar stabilization.....

[MurtlandPhoto]

On 1/27/2018 at 10:32 AM, Robert Collins said:

Is the choice that stark? I mean if the GH5S had ibis that you could turn on or off, would it really have lost that much of its low light ability?

The omission of IBIS is not a 1-to-1 tradeoff. The numerous additional features of the GH5s plus its target market made IBIS impossible.

[Kisaha]

@Robert Collins The ones that we have a moving image background, having IBIS is something that happened a year or two ago. The best IBIS in industry (Olympus) was a photographic affair. People were earning huge amounts of money stabilizing cameras on set, that was, and still is, their only job.

A photographer is a guy (or girl) having a camera, a couple of lenses and a flash gun, and that's it. With that setup you can do a great amount of photo work. Controlling motion and emotion through continuous -or not- time is something different and usually takes more than 1 person (the bare minimum is a camera person, and a sound person).

The same goes for AF too, until Canon Dual Pixel, especially on C300mkII/C200 cameras, AF was something completely exotic to moving images. Best lenses in industry, that having a few of those, probably cost more than your house, do not have any auto focusing mechanisms. Best cameras in industry do not have IBIS too.

[Robert Collins]

31 minutes ago, MurtlandPhoto said:

The omission of IBIS is not a 1-to-1 tradeoff. The numerous additional features of the GH5s plus its target market made IBIS impossible.

This is quite a bold statement you have made but is it true? I mean a couple of people have stated on this forum that the GH5s cant have IBIS because it has a 'bigger sensor' (and there isnt room for the ibis.) Well actually the sensor is exactly the same size in the GH5s as the GH5 so that cant be it.

It might be an overheating issue but I doubt it with that sized body and sensor. It could well be a cost of build issue and Panasonic's belief that the 'target market' wouldnt be prepared to pay for ibis. Could be but I question Panasonic's judgement here.

And let's face it Panasonic hasnt done well with M43. The attached chart pretty much shows that Panasonic's share of mirrorless has fallen 75% of the past 6 years (while Olympus has remained flat) 'despite' all the innovation Panasonic has brought to the video end of the market.

And I would have thought the big market for the video-centric ILC market is catching those still photogs who are moving over to video/hybrid cameras simply 'because' they have largely tackled the two biggest hindrances to video - namely 'focus' and 'stabilization'. I have always felt that Panasonic has been incredibly adept at creating 'defeat from the jaws of victory' with their poor autofocus, now apparently they seem happy to throw away their greatest competitive advantage - namely stabilization.

And dont get me wrong. I fully respect those people who have the skill set to 'pull focus' and stabilize their cameras and realize they can achieve productions values well beyond any current 'auto' feature. I just feel these specialized skills will end up being a valuable niche in a mass market.

[MurtlandPhoto]

31 minutes ago, Robert Collins said:

This is quite a bold statement you have made but is it true? I mean a couple of people have stated on this forum that the GH5s cant have IBIS because it has a 'bigger sensor' (and there isnt room for the ibis.) Well actually the sensor is exactly the same size in the GH5s as the GH5 so that cant be it.

It might be an overheating issue but I doubt it with that sized body and sensor. It could well be a cost of build issue and Panasonic's belief that the 'target market' wouldnt be prepared to pay for ibis. Could be but I question Panasonic's judgement here.

The GH5s has a multi-aspect sensor meaning that the sensor is actually larger than the imaging circle of a m43 lens. When speaking out the amount of room needed for IBIS, we're not just talking about physical room in the camera body but also room within the imaging circle. 

You make a pretty bold statement yourself regarding overheating. What evidence or data do you have that suggests IBIS wouldn't introduce an overheating issue? 

[Mattias Burling]

31 minutes ago, MurtlandPhoto said:

The GH5s has a multi-aspect sensor meaning that the sensor is actually larger than the imaging circle of a m43 lens. 

Many if not most m4/3 lenses cover APS-C. And it might be large, but not that large.

[Robert Collins]

35 minutes ago, MurtlandPhoto said:

The GH5s has a multi-aspect sensor meaning that the sensor is actually larger than the entire imaging circle of a m43 lens. When speaking out the amount of room needed for IBIS, we're not just talking about physical room in the camera body but also room within the imaging circle. 

Look I dont know if I am the one being stupid here or I cant get my point across. I assume we can 'agree' that the 'image circle' created by the GH5s is exactly the same size as the image circle created by the GH5 (right?). And we also know the exact dimensions of the GH5s sensor is exactly the same as the sensor dimensions of the GH5 sensor (see attached).

So I simply dont get 'the sensor is actually larger than the entire imaging circle of a m43 lens' because they are exactly the same sized sensor with exactly the same sized image circle.

You make a pretty bold statement yourself regarding overheating. What evidence or data do you have that suggests IBIS wouldn't introduce an overheating issue? 

Well I dont have any evidence apart from the fact the fact that I dont understand why the same size sensor with the same bit rate as the GH5 would have any reason to over heat.

 

 

[MurtlandPhoto]

"So I simply dont get 'the sensor is actually larger than the entire imaging circle of a m43 lens' because they are exactly the same sized sensor with exactly the same sized image circle."

The effective imaging area is larger than most other m43 chips, thus making the FOV wider on the GH5s. It's minimal but IBIS on this sensor could cause vignetting on native Panny lenses; something they would not want to happen (my opinion). 

From DPReview:

"Well I dont have any evidence apart from the fact the fact that I dont understand why the same size sensor with the same bit rate as the GH5 would have any reason to over heat."

Even if those two factors remain constant, there are other variables. The cameras have two completely different sensors with vastly different circuitry. The sensor readout speed is faster and AF is improved (minimally) on the GH5s. Also, anecdotally my GH5 always has run hotter than my GH4. A symptom of IBIS? Maybe.

My point is that numerous Panasonic reps have stated their reasonings for omitting IBIS from the camera. I don't understand how so many people think they know better.

[noone]

I have a camera that shoots at 12mp in 3:2 aspect ratio and 10mp in 16:9 ratio, if it had a multi aspect sensor it would shoot 12mp for both (or something like that).