Panasonic GH6

[PPNS]

2 hours ago, John Matthews said:

I will look for the Meike lenses to see. I’ve always been hesitant unless I really have a use-case. Right now, I have so many lenses it’s ridiculous… need to sell more. Thanks for the tip though.

probably some of the nicest lenses to use for video on mft. what might also be interesting is that i had the chance to compare them to Zeiss CP2s. while i dont want to take away the advantages of the zeiss (PL/swappable mount, the majority of the set covers FF, some lenses are faster), they really dont look better than the meikes. the general look is very similar, but the zeiss set has more unpleasant aberrations wide open when pointed towards a light source. the focus breathing is way more apparent on the CP2s as well (cropped to mft, on FF theyre almost unusable due to the breathing imo). pretty crazy for a set thats easily about 1/10th the price.

[PannySVHS]

And the cp2s look ugly on mft bidies compared to the elegant meikes or veydras. @PPNS
 Btw, how is your short doing, which you did with your bmpcc4k meike combo?

[PannySVHS]

On 11/22/2022 at 8:05 AM, Beritar said:

The issue I have with the GH6 is the new noise reduction algorithm (called 3D), it makes the low light really cleaner than GH5 but it also smear details in some areas of the image in low light even at ISO 200 (a bit like the Samsung NX1 but much less aggressive), even with the NR set at -5.

yikes. I would love to hear @deezid with his observation on this. Thanks for pointing out. Gh5 got mushy from iso 1600 on. Not a pretty sight.

[Emanuel]

13 hours ago, John Matthews said:

Well, if Sony is what you're looking for, just buy that and move on. Why would you be so insistent on a GH6 if all is good on the Sony?

This doesn't make any sense, are you talking to whom exactly now? Is someone else's dick bigger than anyone else? I don't take you as a believer, I guess not : ) You mean, thinking out loud? Of course, to praise this or that benefit about some brand doesn't diminish some other. What distinguishes the attitude (applies for professional career too) is not the brand you acquire but for sure, much more the fact you won't dress this or that shirt just because you've purchased from them. No idea how many years any or everyone here is spending their own money on gear but I know how many years I've been placing mine. Yes, as repeatedly witten, Panasonic is among them and not little when you stop to count when reaches the number of 11 or 12 camera units... How many times do I have to write it more and more? Phew. NOBODY here or anywhere else should be refrained of any criticism addressed to any brand by unqualified fan love about a camera trademark. No track plays at all. Got it.

 

Now replying to you directly on your invective(s) (one by one) -- that was only a preamble generally speaking... LOL

 

I am not looking specifically for a Sony.

FYI I am used to OWN (and USE) cameras of many manufacturers, so this purchase of a couple of units is only one plus.

The fact I am buying a new system based on a new mount system won't stop me to keep some other mount options JFYI.

But yes, I could have invested on more gear from the same camera supplier than adding a new lineup, that's correct. The point is not for a set of specs. There's another pipe to consider beyond, for making business. Hence the case.

I only said that nothing is wrong with Sony in response to your comment. This should not trigger such reaction or maybe just rhetorical? ; ) No topic justifies that, no thread subject, etc..

 

Said "insistent"?... Really? Who or what actually?

The one who claims against some unacceptable business practices not in favour of any customer from the supply side BTW, is that so? Did we understand it quite well?

Or some discomfort only because someone else has some criticism to address to a sacred cow? I don't believe I'm reading it from you : ) No worries, buyer's remorse is always in good shape when we got a good deal. Something you did and I even praised your luck. This doesn't necessarily mean they behave accordingly with everyone. That's all about that, so let's the world coexist outside.

And please, also some perspective as fair add-on.

Better to be silent where fits to be, not trying to gag whoever else when happens to tell (but could be to think) in a dissonant way.

Simple. Never feed the discussion if we don't stand to listen to. This is nothing about my team against yours. No more words needed to infer how much nonsense sounds to be if so. Let's get the right scope or too much distraction over there.

[Emanuel]

I still want to believe is merely wondering, conveyed by interrogation mark(s) : D

 

[Emanuel]

Back to topic, we've arrived to the point no device will serve of any use in any way other as based on the shooter skills.

[John Matthews]

1 hour ago, Emanuel said:

This doesn't make any sense, are you talking to whom exactly now? Is someone else's dick bigger than anyone else? I don't take you as a believer, I guess not : ) You mean, thinking out loud? Of course, to praise this or that benefit about some brand doesn't diminish some other. What distinguishes the attitude (applies for professional career too) is not the brand you acquire but for sure, much more the fact you won't dress this or that shirt just because you've purchased from them. No idea how many years any or everyone here is spending their own money on gear but I know how many years I've been placing mine. Yes, as repeatedly witten, Panasonic is among them and not little when you stop to count when reaches the number of 11 or 12 camera units... How many times do I have to write it more and more? Phew. NOBODY here or anywhere else should be refrained of any criticism addressed to any brand by unqualified fan love about a camera trademark. No track plays at all. Got it.

 

Now replying to you directly on your invective(s) (one by one) -- that was only a preamble generally speaking... LOL

 

I am not looking specifically for a Sony.

FYI I am used to OWN (and USE) cameras of many manufacturers, so this purchase of a couple of units is only one plus.

The fact I am buying a new system based on a new mount system won't stop me to keep some other mount options JFYI.

But yes, I could have invested on more gear from the same camera supplier than adding a new lineup, that's correct. The point is not for a set of specs. There's another pipe to consider beyond, for making business. Hence the case.

I only said that nothing is wrong with Sony in response to your comment. This should not trigger such reaction or maybe just rhetorical? ; ) No topic justifies that, no thread subject, etc..

 

Said "insistent"?... Really? Who or what actually?

The one who claims against some unacceptable business practices not in favour of any customer from the supply side BTW, is that so? Did we understand it quite well?

Or some discomfort only because someone else has some criticism to address to a sacred cow? I don't believe I'm reading it from you : ) No worries, buyer's remorse is always in good shape when we got a good deal. Something you did and I even praised your luck. This doesn't necessarily mean they behave accordingly with everyone. That's all about that, so let's the world coexist outside.

And please, also some perspective as fair add-on.

Better to be silent where fits to be, not trying to gag whoever else when happens to tell (but could be to think) in a dissonant way.

Simple. Never feed the discussion if we don't stand to listen to. This is nothing about my team against yours. No more words needed to infer how much nonsense sounds to be if so. Let's get the right scope or too much distraction over there.

@Emanuel, I think you read WAY too deep into my question. There's no "team" on my end. I've had lots of different formats and brands in the past too. Some better than others at things. I like Panasonic and Olympus. After my experience, I stay away from Sony (but they can produce some great images) and I don't do Canon after the R5 overheating fiasco... I like their printers though. I've also enjoyed Pentax for stills. It's all good.

[Emanuel]

49 minutes ago, John Matthews said:

@Emanuel, I think you read WAY too deep into my question. There's no "team" on my end. I've had lots of different formats and brands in the past too. Some better than others at things. I like Panasonic and Olympus. After my experience, I stay away from Sony (but they can produce some great images) and I don't do Canon after the R5 overheating fiasco... I like their printers though. I've also enjoyed Pentax for stills. It's all good.

I told you, I didn't want to believe that from yours, so all OK : ) But serves to those who may read you and think otherwise : D Much nonsense a pissing contest between camera brands with people trying to piss farther than "the other side"... LOL 

Oh boy, after all we share the same opinion ; )

With the exception that for first time in 30 years I cannot ignore them anymore as no less investment this occasion. GH6 purchase would be a good excuse to still stay away from Sony or delay it at least.

Well, I am in trouble though, if Amazon or Panasonic will reach me to accept my rant anyway! haha

[John Matthews]

I'm fairly certain that the GH6 is NOT an ISO invariant camera. The test on DPreview for dynamic range in photos is completely falsified due to this fact. I think it's more like a simultaneous bracketed shot, leading to poor shadow performance when severely underexposed. Any ideas? Does that sound right?

I remember back in the day with my Pentax K5 when I could practically underexpose by 5 stops and I could increase exposure in post with the noise being the same as when I shot it 5 stops higher. I could also use my uniWB trick to make sure I never blew a highlight in the green channel... it worked well, but the GH6 is a different beast altogether.

[hyalinejim]

I would definitely try not to err on the side of underexposure with this camera, if possible, unless trying to preserve some very important highlight. If you avoid underexposure, results seem to be pretty clean even at higher ISOs.

[John Matthews]

Just now, hyalinejim said:

I would definitely try not to err on the side of underexposure with this camera, if possible, unless trying to preserve some very important highlight. If you avoid underexposure, results seem to be pretty clean even at higher ISOs.

That's what I'm seeing too. The files are massive (comparatively to even a 20MP sensor) due to the GH6 being 14bit. My questions is, in the example above, what's written in the file that takes 32.5MB? The GH6 acts more like a Canon (non-Sony sensor). You need to get it right in camera, which might be how a mirrorless camera should be.

[hyalinejim]

2 minutes ago, John Matthews said:

what's written in the file that takes 32.5MB?

Noise!

Just kidding 😆 I guess if the RAW files are 14bit versus 12bit for other cams then the file sizes are going to be bigger. Don't know how the JPEG ended up bigger than the RAW though?

[Beritar]

21 hours ago, PannySVHS said:

yikes. I would love to hear @deezid with his observation on this. Thanks for pointing out. Gh5 got mushy from iso 1600 on. Not a pretty sight.

The noise reduction in 4K is not an issue if you don't zoom in your video, but I usually do this ... Sony also uses a lot of noise reduction even in the A7SIII. The GH6 is doing a nice job at reducing noise while keeping some details but there is no way to really remove the noise reduction if you don't shoot RAW. 

However, the 5,7k is great, there is less noise reduction and the image is very nice, but I was surprised that nobody said there is a very slight crop in this mode.

[PannySVHS]

Sounds kinda unappealing. The video comparison I saw looked impressive though. GH6 held onto color and resolution extremely well under lowlight at high isos, better than GH5s. But being more mushy than a GH5 wouldnt cut it for me in anyway. Would rather go with a GH5II then, providing an extra S16 mode, pixelperfect HD 100p, 4K60p in 10bit  420,  and a true zero sharpening option for the "organic image".

[deezid]

There's way less NR on the GH6 than on the S1H even when shooting V-Log and even less so when shooting ProRes.
Really confused about the experiences here, was NR set to lowest (0) 😅

[deezid]

5 hours ago, PannySVHS said:

And a true zero sharpening option for the "organic image".

Hoping for an update to the GH6 for that 🙂
Thankfully the GH5 II also barely has any NR, so the image won't be as mushy as on the GH5s or A7sIII/FX3.

[FHDcrew]

1 hour ago, deezid said:

Hoping for an update to the GH6 for that 🙂
Thankfully the GH5 II also barely has any NR, so the image won't be as mushy as on the GH5s or A7sIII/FX3.

Wow with the low NR and zero-sharpening the GH5 II is shaping up to be an organic beast!  The thing is cheap on the used market too!

[Emanuel]

Pity no 4:2:2 on 10-bit above 30p for GH5 II...

[John Matthews]

Anybody have a good cfexpress type b card reader recommendation? Should I just get a cheap one, go based on looks alone, or are there any real differences? The transfer rate via the supplied usb cable from Panasonic doesn't seem adequate.

[IronFilm]

On 11/25/2022 at 8:09 PM, John Matthews said:

On a side note, I think I might have to reevaluate my workflow. I can no longer keep original files forever as if I choose the best quality in prores 422HQ at a rediculous 5.7/5.8k, I think I'll have enough space for a week. Instead, I think I'll need a more streamlined approach, correcting footage on the fly to make make reasonably-sized 150Mbps files that would still be good for making final small edits. I'm almost considering to just shoot 1080p on the camera as it looks so good and no one I know will probably see a difference anyway. Any Suggestions?

How often do you need your backup files? If rarely ever, then I'd say keep your originals for a month after delivery, then once that date has elapsed have a batch script you run to convert the originals to teeny 1080 h265 8bit files to then store forever ("just in case" in an emergency) and delete the originals.