Panasonic GH7

[John Matthews]

17 minutes ago, Davide DB said:

 

Well, yes and no. It depends...

Modern housings bring outside all the controls and remap them in a more ergonomic position for underwater use. A housing is like a glove with a perfect fit. 

Once upon a time the internal mechanisms allowed micro adjustments to compensate for small production variations between camera bodies. They no longer exist but I remember that the legendary GH2 was little more than a toy and when I changed the camera body because I had flooded the housing I had to change the rubber wheels that acted on the diaphragms because the wheels of the two bodies were slightly different. Now with more professional cameras the problem no longer exists.
To show you how even 1 mm can make a difference, this is the back of an S1H, outside and inside. A small gem of engineering. You understand that when a new camera model uses the previous body, I open a bottle of sparkling wine 🙂

Now I understand why they cost so much. Damn, I would not want to be the engineer to design and produce such a contraption. There would have to be a huge hidden cost with every minute change in chassis.

[Davide DB]

Until the early years of digital cameras, the few housing manufacturers produced housings for one or at most two camera models. The top of the line for Nikon and Canon. Then digital cameras became more and more complicated, with more and more controls, and the manufacturers went into crisis. the digital revolution caught them off guard and they could not keep up with the new releases. It took over a year to design and make a housing. 
Nauticam revolutionized the market by applying industrial design and construction logic to an industry where all companies were (are) little more than skilled craftsmen.
Now the housings come out almost simultaneously with the release of the new cameras, probably thanks to agreements between companies that are able to get the designs in advance. They are producing housings for the more niche camera models, the problem is that the cost has skyrocketed. A housing for a mirrorless goes from 3K Euros to over 4.5K Euros (without dome and lens port) A housing for a cinema camera goes to over 20K Euros with all the accessories. The second hand market is ruthless with prices less than 50% if you are lucky to get one of the latest, mainstream models.
When you decide to change, the camera body is almost the least of the problems.

[IronFilm]

26 minutes ago, Davide DB said:

The second hand market is ruthless with prices less than 50% if you are lucky to get one of the latest, mainstream models.

Yeah I personally would never ever ever buy a proper underwater housing for a current gen camera! Waaaaaaaaay too expensive. 

I have a splash bag, but if I was to get a "real" kit then I'd be getting it for a GH5 (heck, maybe even a GH4 if the price is cheap enough!). Definitely not for the newer GH6 or GH7

Or perhaps even the chinese Seafrogs underwater casings. 

Of course if I was doing this professionally, the economics of all of this becomes totally different. And you go for the best. 

[Beritar]

2 hours ago, kye said:

Maybe you would benefit from using back-button focus?  I use it on the GX85 and it works brilliantly because you have full control over when the AF is enabled.

Yes I use the AF-ON (or the shutter) button everytime on the GH6, even when I record in AF-C. I always did this with the GH4, GH5 etc.
But it's not very convenient in some situations.

[Davide DB]

14 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

have a splash bag, but if I was to get a "real" kit then I'd be getting it for a GH5 (heck, maybe even a GH4 if the price is cheap enough!). Definitely not for the newer GH6 or GH7

Or perhaps even the chinese Seafrogs underwater casings. 

The problem with Seafrogs are the low quality domes and ports.

P.S. 
I have a housing for the GH4 that I use as a paperweight 🙂

 

[Beritar]

2 hours ago, John Matthews said:

I wish "organic" were a defined term, but it's not. To me, in Standard profile, it just looks the way I remember it being. The skin tones look diverse enough yet not accentuating skin blemishes. What I don't like is when I need to put more contrast in the skin tones because the camera reduced the contrast too much. At least for my caucasian skin, it looked nice. The files and colors just seemed to have some depth to them.

I never noticed this; nor can I fathom why this would happen, but I cannot say with any certainty it happens not. What I did notice was it was practically impossible to confidently manually focus with large aperture lenses. The magnified image seemed too soft. This is unlike the GH5. I'm not sure about the GH7, but I have asked about without a real response.

For everything you said about the AF, I soon realized that the GH6 couldn't be fully dependable and it was always better to use manual focus and make good use of the [AF] button on the screen or assigning a button. For video and AF, I think it's clear that PDAF is essential in 2024. Any testing of continuous AF with the current contrast systems seems futile and almost a waste of time IMO. I don't really understand why, but I've always thought Olympus had much better contrast AF than Panasonic (even with the millions they'd probably spent on testing, engineering, and especially marketing Depth by Defocus). In good light, Olympus cameras performed as their PDAF counterparts. I also didn't really notice a big difference from the GH2 to the GH6- what does that say? There was only a lot more boxes on the screen but the results were practically the same.

To notice you need to watch footage on big/high resolution screens, or cropping a lot (to make zoom or pan in the image by exemple). Skin textures by exemple looks more mushy.
The S5II also has worse detail rendering than the S5 and S1, but this time the S5II uses a lot of sharpening to try to hide the lack of details. Honestly, in 4K and the standard profiles, the S5II image sometimes look like a bad oversampled 1080P. I was always interested by Panasonic because they always had very good detail rendering like on the GH5, G85, GX85, S5, S1 etc. But now, I only seek cameras with internal raw because most brands use too much sharpening and noise reduction to get a better DR score.

Yes I agree PDAF is essential, but I didn't think the GH6 could have worse AF accuracy (below 48fps) and worse pulsing in Open Gate than the old GH5. Especially when most youtuber said the AF of the GH6 was much better. At first I thought I have a bad sample of the GH6, but after using 3 GH6, I confirmed it was a general issue.

[John Matthews]

31 minutes ago, Beritar said:

To notice you need to watch footage on big/high resolution screens, or cropping a lot (to make zoom or pan in the image by exemple). Skin textures by exemple looks more mushy.
The S5II also has worse detail rendering than the S5 and S1, but this time the S5II uses a lot of sharpening to try to hide the lack of details. Honestly, in 4K and the standard profiles, the S5II image sometimes look like a bad oversampled 1080P. I was always interested by Panasonic because they always had very good detail rendering like on the GH5, G85, GX85, S5, S1 etc. But now, I only seek cameras with internal raw because most brands use too much sharpening and noise reduction to get a better DR score.

Yes I agree PDAF is essential, but I didn't think the GH6 could have worse AF accuracy (below 48fps) and worse pulsing in Open Gate than the old GH5. Especially when most youtuber said the AF of the GH6 was much better. At first I thought I have a bad sample of the GH6, but after using 3 GH6, I confirmed it was a general issue.

My feeling is that the GH6 is prioritizing the midtones whereas the G9ii and S5ii are prioritizing dynamic range. Could that be the reason? As I'm 50 years old, I cannot honestly tell that much of a difference between the 4k and the 1080p that is oversampled. Also, I always turn off sharpening and NR. For me, the image looks acceptable. Is it 2024 awesome image quality? Maybe not, but I doubt anyone could tell the difference that much. It sounds like the GH7 is the one for you in that it really has that internal raw capability and you can add what you want in post. For me, I know way less than those Panasonic engineers and I'm just going to tweak the settings they gave me- good enough, job done, and Bob's your uncle. (I was looking for an opportunity to use that phrase- not British).

[Emanuel]

18 hours ago, Ninpo33 said:

No issue with the term, "Medium Format Look" but this...? This is just a dumb statement. Would love to know where you developed this ignorant and misguided opinion.

When the user wrote that the focal reducer sucks, I guess it's because of the experience to have to couple more glass to the camera/lens setup...

The point is that the now infamous : D 'medium format look' is often referred for the circle of confusion, which is something crucial going along optics, the border between what it is in focus and its visual impact (where all the aforementioned process of perception arises) with the bokeh (comes from the word boke, blur in Japanese) -- and let alone all the discussion about the quality of the bokeh itself, as much as colour rendition, etc..

Let's take this DoF tool in hands for the introduction of a 0.7x reducing factor:

For some reason to deal with the real size of the 645D sensor, there's a negligeable difference with the film counterpart but a substantial distinction as far as the CoC concerns compared with FF.

The larger it is the smoother the look will end.

- EAG

 

 

[IronFilm]

14 hours ago, Davide DB said:

The problem with Seafrogs are the low quality domes and ports.

But perfectly "good enough" for amateurs and very early stage professionals? 

Then once you're past that point and you're an established professional, then well I guess you just have to pay up for "the best" and pass the costs along to the clients. 

14 hours ago, Davide DB said:

P.S. 
I have a housing for the GH4 that I use as a paperweight 🙂

Give it me!! 😛 😆 I have a GH4...

nah, I'm kidding. What I meant to say, is you should sell it while it still has value!!!

ebay suggests you could perhaps get maybe $1K-ish for it if you're patient: 

https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_nkw=Nauticam+gh4&_sacat=0&_sop=15&rt=nc&LH_Sold=1&LH_Complete=1 

[kye]

Another comparison

I pulled the video into Resolve and did a little grading on the GH7 LogC image to match the Alexa, and it wasn't too hard to get this:

Obviously colour grading a Log image that has been through YT is an abysmal image pipeline, so take that into account.  

It would be interesting to play with the files and see how they feel.  I suspect the vast majority of people would be looking to get the LogC upgrade in order to get a nicer image, rather than match an Alexa, so shooting Vlog and LogC and then trying to work with the images would be interesting.

[Ninpo33]

On 6/17/2024 at 10:34 PM, Emanuel said:

When the user wrote that the focal reducer sucks, I guess it's because of the experience to have to couple more glass to the camera/lens setup...

The point is that the now infamous : D 'medium format look' is often referred for the circle of confusion, which is something crucial going along optics, the border between what it is in focus and its visual impact (where all the aforementioned process of perception arises) with the bokeh (comes from the word boke, blur in Japanese) -- and let alone all the discussion about the quality of the bokeh itself, as much as colour rendition, etc..

Let's take this DoF tool in hands for the introduction of a 0.7x reducing factor:

For some reason to deal with the real size of the 645D sensor, there's a negligeable difference with the film counterpart but a substantial distinction as far as the CoC concerns compared with FF.

The larger it is the smoother the look will end.

- EAG

 

 

That’s all well and good but for the longest time even high end productions use cine expanders, wide angle adapters, and yes… focal reducers. Just an ignorant statement to make and doesn’t help the op’s cause or credit their other views. 

[lsquare]

Seems like there are a lot of OT discussions here. Is anyone else excited about the GH7? Does anyone wish Panasonic developed an 8K sensor? Maybe we'll get one with the GH8?

[Emanuel]

8 hours ago, kye said:

Another comparison

I pulled the video into Resolve and did a little grading on the GH7 LogC image to match the Alexa, and it wasn't too hard to get this:

Obviously colour grading a Log image that has been through YT is an abysmal image pipeline, so take that into account.  

It would be interesting to play with the files and see how they feel.  I suspect the vast majority of people would be looking to get the LogC upgrade in order to get a nicer image, rather than match an Alexa, so shooting Vlog and LogC and then trying to work with the images would be interesting.

Apples to oranges. Impossible to compare a pretty face with another one... Even when the angle is not the same! Let alone when she is prettier to each test published ; ) LOL

[IronFilm]

6 hours ago, lsquare said:

Seems like there are a lot of OT discussions here. Is anyone else excited about the GH7? Does anyone wish Panasonic developed an 8K sensor? Maybe we'll get one with the GH8?

Because this thread got hijacked to talk about sensor sizes, we're talking about GH cameras instead over on the thread for FF cameras:

 

[eatstoomuchjam]

6 hours ago, lsquare said:

Does anyone wish Panasonic developed an 8K sensor? Maybe we'll get one with the GH8?

As far as I remember, Panasonic don't develop sensors.  They integrate sensors from Sony.

But to answer the question, no.  Unless technology has improved, going to 8K on M43 is likely to make the image noisier and I couldn't care much less about 8K vs 6K.

[lsquare]

1 hour ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

As far as I remember, Panasonic don't develop sensors.  They integrate sensors from Sony.

But to answer the question, no.  Unless technology has improved, going to 8K on M43 is likely to make the image noisier and I couldn't care much less about 8K vs 6K.

Right, and I hope Panasonic will put an 8K sensor in the GH8. 

If Panasonic can get the same ISO characteristics as the GH7's sensor in a future GH8, why not?

[IronFilm]

1 hour ago, lsquare said:

If Panasonic can get the same ISO characteristics as the GH7's sensor in a future GH8, why not?

"if"

Those two letters are doing a lot of the work in that sentence. 

[PannySVHS]

3 hours ago, lsquare said:

Right, and I hope Panasonic will put an 8K sensor in the GH8. 

If Panasonic can get the same ISO characteristics as the GH7's sensor in a future GH8, why not?

Now isn't THAT the question of questions IF you want to discuss the GH7!😂

Like I answered you in one of your other many recent threads, GH7 open gate has the same pixel count in height as 8k video format. You still prefer to sit 5 feet infront of your 65" TV in disbelief.

I feel overwhelmed by forum posts of bots, bats and time travellers. As you being a total newbie to video, as you stated here, it is both very akward, that you posted extensively about your FZ1000 in 2014 and after a ten year forum break you have become "a total newbie" to videography.

 

[Davide DB]

However, we are truly insatiable. The GH7 is not yet available and we are already thinking about the GH8 and the 8K!

Let's say that who cares will have a slight chance with the upcoming S1H.

Back to the GH7, I'm waiting to see more reliable reviews and use cases once it's in the hands of normal people. Now more or less all the influencers all repeat the same things in parrot fashion having had the camera for a short time.

For example, I didn't understand anything about Raw and here you explained me crop factors at various resolutions in Raw but on Youtube I couldn't find any mention of it and specific tests. Maybe I haven't looked properly but it seems to me that so far we are still at "WOW it works" and little more.

[lsquare]

40 minutes ago, Davide DB said:

However, we are truly insatiable. The GH7 is not yet available and we are already thinking about the GH8 and the 8K!

Let's say that who cares will have a slight chance with the upcoming S1H.

Back to the GH7, I'm waiting to see more reliable reviews and use cases once it's in the hands of normal people. Now more or less all the influencers all repeat the same things in parrot fashion having had the camera for a short time.

For example, I didn't understand anything about Raw and here you explained me crop factors at various resolutions in Raw but on Youtube I couldn't find any mention of it and specific tests. Maybe I haven't looked properly but it seems to me that so far we are still at "WOW it works" and little more.

I'm not convinced the influencers can give a negative review if they want to maintain a good relationship with their camera supplier.