GH5 Panasonic camera, from anticipation to love or hate

Eno

@Vesku. I've just checked ISO 100 vs 200 on JPG and RAW. In RAW, there's almost an imperceptible loos in highlight detail at ISO 100 but in JPG it's obvious.Very interesting...

Vesku

Iso100 is very good for RAW. Iso100 in JPG and video is crippled. I wonder why it works well in Olympus and in APS-C cameras.

c3hammer

@Eno, I always shoot 16-235. There is NO highlight latitude in ISO 100 at all. All highlight information is gone in any video mode I've tried it in. There are few youtube video's that show how bad extended ISO really is out there.

Eno

@Vesku & @c3hammer Thanks for the info.

I was more interested in ISO 100 highlight latitude for (RAW) still purposes rather than video. :)

Vesku

@Eno

GH5 highlights burn gradually more and more when going from iso200 to iso160, iso125, iso100 in video mode.

The GH5 noise is so much cleaner in iso200 than in GH4 that the need for cleaner iso100 is not important. When using fullhd crop mode the iso100-iso160 are valuable (cleaner) but you must be careful with highlights.

Luminance levels dont make any difference.

Eno

@c3hammer Have you tried setting the luminance levels to 16-235 instead of the default 16-255?

c3hammer

Maybe for stills the GH5 works with extended ISO, but you get about 6 stops at ISO 100 in video mode. Extended ISO blows about 3 or 4 stops of highlights to white in 4K 60p. I'd highly recommend you test it in video mode before ever using extended ISO on a GH5

Eno

Everybody is trying to push the dark parts of an image to measure DR, but very few also look at highlight DR, which IMO is equally important in the image.

I personally see a very little loss (almost imperceptible) in the GH5 highlight DR from base IS0 200 to extended ISO 100. In fact the GH5 has more rage at extended ISO 100 than the very good D750 has at it's native base ISO 100 (based in Imaging Resource RAW samples).

caveport

400mbs will happen. So many pessimists here.

filthy

@markr041 "So, with an external recorder (e.g. Atomos Inferno) you can record UHD at 400+ Mbps (Pro res) 4:2:2 from a Sony, and you don't have to shoot with a puny sensor."

Let's not forget that's it's $1,000 extra for that A7SII plus the cost of the recorder and media. Not to mention the extra cost that is usually associated with FF lenses for that cam. The whole point of this FW update was to enable this ability in camera. Much different and much bigger deal IMHO. Plus the GH5 already shoots 422 10 bit internally with no need of recorder if that's all one is after.

Vitaliy_Kiselev

@markr041

It is two part issue. One being good encoder being very complex. Another being very complex conflicting licenses.

markr041

I still don't understand why they don't just use H.265 to improve quality and not have to increase the bitrate. This does seem to be a market failure.

Vitaliy_Kiselev

@Brian_Siano

Seriously, though, what's the latest word on this patch? (And would using an external recorder enable higher bitrates without the patch?)

Not patch. It is firmware update.
We'll see how it goes. But this words are official and it make zero sense to delay it for camera they expect to ship in December at best if you have it working without issues, as it is good sale point.
Management figured out that high bitrates are popular.

fancydancer

markr041

Of course an external recorder "enables" higher bitrates. That is true for any camera that has a clean HDMI out. Indeed, many cameras output 4:2:2 color (all Sony's) through the HDMI port. So, with an external recorder (e.g. Atomos Inferno) you can record UHD at 400+ Mbps (Pro res) 4:2:2 from a Sony, and you don't have to shoot with a puny sensor.

Brian_Siano

Seriously, though, what's the latest word on this patch? (And would using an external recorder enable higher bitrates without the patch?)

Vitaliy_Kiselev

@thetrickster

You can't pull that does not exist.

They just delayed it a little. Plus formally summer ends in January :-)

thetrickster

Hmmm, so they state that a 400Mbps firmware is coming and then pull it - I presume we can all send back our GH5 for a refund.... :)

Vitaliy_Kiselev

@HillTop1

Also EVA1 is first time repeat of same PR hysteria we had with AF100. Even some faces are still same and not had been made responsible for losses Panasonic had with AF100.

HillTop1

lol my translation, the LSI in the EVA1 is probably similar to that in the GH5 because Panasonic will not wanna take the cost to design a new LSI for the EVA1; a camera small custome camera that's probably not gonna sell well.

400Mbps is probably not gonna happen but PR and marketing is gonna try to safe face lol.

Vitaliy_Kiselev

@HillTop1

Today LSI design and masks cost so much that companies hardly can offer to make custom chips for such small scales as expected EVA1 sales.

Small guys like BM and Red use very inefficient FPGA to make it work for their scale.

Of course marketing and PR will fight for death that it is super duper custom thing.

HillTop1

@Vitaliy_Kiselev Any idea if the LSI in the EVA1 is same or similar to that of the GH5 and in your opinion do you think they will be able to deliver that 400Mbps update?

Wish canon had more info about their feature XF-AVC update on the C200. Would have made my decision a little easier. But then again, maybe they don't wanna promise something they can't deliver.

Vitaliy_Kiselev

Current Panasonic LSI problems with 400Mbit are serious

From EVA1 press release

On first release, available bit rates will range from as low as 8Mbps up to 150Mbps, depending on frame rate, resolution, and codec. In a future firmware update, 400Mbps recording will be added.

Developers for now are unable to make it work.

thetrickster

Price in the UK hasn't really moved since launch. There has been a few offers here and there, but still at £1699 body only.

joe1946

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

Tags in Topic

Top Posters