GH4 4K Panasonic video camera, official topic

mpgxsvcd

Looks like ISO 12,800 is an electrical gain for the GH4 and ISO 100 might be real or close to real as well. ISO 25,600 certainly is not real for the GH4. Otherwise dynamic range and color according to DXO Mark are almost identical to the GH3.

I can only assume that the GH4 specs are now finalized or they wouldn't have allowed DXO mark to publish results, right?

jrd

@adamT

Was the self parody intentional?

I think we can assume that anyone who engages in discussion has made up his mind about something or other. The question is whether there's there's any basis in reality for the assertions being made.

My views were clearly stated: based on footage posted so far, the GH4 doesn't produce great images, that it absolutely doesn't surpass any number of cameras in the <$15K range, and given the nature of low-budget filmmaking, it wouldn't matter if it did produce superlative images, to the extent anyone believes the GH4 or any other camera will be decisive in his/her career.

Feel free to refute any of the above.

jamesgh2

@jrd

Good points, however my mind wasn't made up at first until I handled the footage, that made it. BTW I make my living selling B-Roll footage to all major TV stations and Hollywood studios, have used several pro cameras that cost more than cars. The GH4 footage is better than most of them and resolution wise it is right up there with the RED. Add a 4k recorder for 10 bit and you have a very impressive cinema ready device.

BTW no holy grail exists, the a7s has better low light same goes for the Alexa, and the RED has better IQ and features at the end of the day but all have drawbacks in price or features still.

But for $1700 you cant really see this as anything but a gem!

Im sorry for being too excited in my previous post, I sounded like describing a new Ferrari with Kate Upton on the passenger seat. ;)

jimagine

I like people who are passionate about their art and tools. Having produced with all levels of cameras for a long time - he's really not exaggerating. This camera really does deliver, on many levels, a sort of the ideal, small film making tool - with the things that people really have been waiting for in a DSLR form factor. It hits it on all levels from a functionality standpoint, while keeping the ease of on board SD recording. Unlike mini-DV era, this camera really could compete, IQ wise, at a cinema level.

It looks like a great, small camera system. I feel the same way about the BM cameras as far as IQ and DR, and they have very limited interfaces. Looking forward to playing with the GH4

Ian_T

@jrd personally I think it's one thing to disregard those who make a little to be more than it really is...but to say the GH-4 does not make great images is beyond a stretch. Of course it does. It might not look as good as...this or that camera...(make your own choice) but nobody here (coming from a GH-2 / GH-3 or any of the lower end cameras we've been using for the last few years) should make a claim like that. If you qualified that statement with "compared to...." then it would help make your point. I'm not putting you down but it seems like maybe you're just annoyed by the overly hyped behavior of those who can really appreciate a camera like this. It's like watching a kid eating the candy at the candy store... we all know how that is. Wasn't it you who was comparing...or shooting your GH-2 with a Red not too long ago. The image from this camera potentially looks better than any of the GH-2 hacks. I say "potentially" because we've yet to see something with substance shot with this camera. Just sayin....

kellar42

There haven't been any excuses for a long time. Still I want this camera to ship!

driftwood

Download Philip Bloom's Vegas Night Ride with a GH4 here: https://t.co/QNonrvo1YR

This was recorded at 4K UHD 3840*2160 mp4 mode it appears. Its an ok test considering he's not had much time with it.

*UPDATE: The recording shows 200Mbps so he's done some transcoding to it. Ignore it as a test.

jrd

@Ian_T

Yes, compared to the GH2, the GH4 is a clear advance, but there are so many other choices today, standards are higher now in the <$3K realm (much less $15K!).

I'll go further, FWIW: to my eyes, the GH4 footage is over-processed, probably a combination of sharpening, odd color casts and in-camera "enhancement". Lower contrast, saturation, sharpening settings might help, also non-lumix lenses. Impossible to say, without having the camera in hand. But it becomes more evident, as you grade the footage, and hit a wall -- the point where the stuff is difficult to look at. Even some minimally graded stuff can put your teeth on edge.

But of course, this is subjective, others will see it differently. All I can say is, if anyone's interested in my view, grade before you buy.

(Comparisons of GH2/Red did not come from me. It was some other malefactor!)

caveport

@jrd I have been very impressed with how the GH4 footage grades. I use DaVinci Resolve for grading and the footage I have downloaded with the Cinelike D settings, grades very well. Yes they are only 8bit 4:2:0 samples I have tried, so it's not perfect and I can see some issues like noise in dark saturated colours & some compression artefacts, but I think it's a fine camera for a lot of applications.

I'm not convinced that emotional terms like "put your teeth on edge" are helpful in this discussion.

driftwood

@jrd Thats your personal-view, I think we've understood that now. :-)

jrd

I'm not convinced that emotional terms like "put your teeth on edge" are helpful in this discussion.

Okay, I'll try to clarify. The color, in those instances, is not accurate, edges are unnaturally sharp, the footage has an overall color cast difficult to neutralize, and clipping is abrupt and deadly in the course of grading, for lack of DR.

jamesgh2

Just graded the Driftwood's 10 bit approximation file and color me impressed. I could push it like crazy with several layers of CC and it didn't break. Only problem area is the right eye below the cap where noise was present since the beginning, just looks a tad wrong. Other than that like butter.

endotoxic

i have seen enought! read enough and though enough.

This camera is an massive achievement for the masses. You can really grade this shit all the way to the moon on 10bit 4:2:2

With PL lenses an a proper cinematographer this sensor will shine all the way. I allways though m4/3 size sensor is the sweet spot since original 4:3 cinema standard was like this sensor size. Now we have the better sensor ever made for this series and fuck men!!! is an NMO sensor!! captures light pseudo CCD like, so this is fantastic is GH2 GH1 pedigree for real, no that Sony shit GH3 sensor. No offence GH3 users. The look on GH4 will be there just give time for proper DP.

for the price this camera rock solid over the competition. Shine now M43

Manu4Vendetta

endotoxic

seems to me that its like no one can manage to expose correctly this sensor. the exposure is always on the highlights, post processing will give you the desired look and data on the shadows. This tests don't give the true potential of this camera, its a shame. :-(

caveport

@jrd Quote: "Okay, I'll try to clarify. The color, in those instances, is not accurate, edges are unnaturally sharp, the footage has an overall color cast difficult to neutralize, and clipping is abrupt and deadly in the course of grading, for lack of DR." No technical info here, still more emotional terms i.e. "abrupt and deadly".

Examples would be useful, or references to particular test footage. Accurate colour is VERY difficult to judge without having seen the original scene. Colour casts are a camera setup issue. IMO not difficult to fix as grading is what I do for a job ;-) EVERY camera will show colour casts due to colour temperature variation, including sunlight time of day issues. ALL clipping is harsh looking unless using soft clip LUT's or highlight curves to prevent harsh clipping edges. This is not unique to this camera. Lack of DR comment has me perplexed.

nobbystylus

@ driftwood - Bloom's mp4 night vegas shots aren't great in the dark areas. Compression is pretty bad in low light. I'm guessing / hoping thats just the mp4 codec?

itimjim

@nobbystylus I was fairly impressed with the image. Agreed there's some compression and smearing in the darker areas, but it's still pretty impressive. I have a little more hope about this camera. Problem is, I can't really be all that bothered with an external recorder :(

neokoo

@driftwood

Do you know if that Philip Bloom night drive clip is directly from GH4, or is it recompressed?

QuickTime tells it's 3840x2160 at 200Mbps and quick calculation based on duration and filesize tells the same. I thought GH4 is supposed to do 4k/UHD only at 100Mbps.

nobbystylus

@ itimjim - i think the image looks fine, its just not an improvement on GH2 / GH3 in lowlight compression. Don't wanna jump the gun but if its an mp4 specific thing then it'd be good to know. Haven't seen much lowlight footage so far apart from this.

Astro

@jrd Honestly I read through the last few pages of this forum...and you are being really boring. What are you trying to achieve? thats the question you perhaps should be asking yourself...so you think the GH4 is not that good...fine, but post after post about "oversharpening, colorcast, it will hit a grading wall and whatever else you can dredge up." You are coming across as someone that has a strong bias against the Camera.

So why dont you go to a forum that has a camera you like and post there instead of trolling the negative stuff here, people like Driftwood and others here have had far more hands on the Gh4 than you have and they like it, people that have graded several images with it like it ...yet you continue to push your views.

Again "What are trying to achieve exactly"?...that you have a better eye than anyone else incl Driftwood and some others that do grading for a living here...well I seriously doubt that, the images look mostly great to me and I am an artist by trade (you know the type that actually creates images and makes them look good from scratch) So really ..go and buy an Arri or a $15,000 Canon or something and be happy and enjoy your "perfect" camera and make a movie and be happy.

jrd

No technical info here, still more emotional terms

If you want "technical info" you're in the wrong place. In 69 pages, there's not a color chart , DR measurement, resolution chart, etc. If you regard my description of the footage's shortcomings, which are specific, as "emotional", how would you describe the expressions of joy and delight here? Objective assessments?

For anyone who thinks this material grades well, or that there's abundant DR, there's plenty to compare it to on the web. Film scans, 4:2:2 footage, etc. Give it a try. Also look closely at the samples of grades posted here, including the one a few posts above. Nothing wrong?

But, that said, @Astro is absolutely right: there's no point in continuing this conversation. The whole thing recalls previous discussions about the GH2, where posters insisted that the GH2 was the best video camera under $10K or $20K, etc. etc. etc., and saying otherwise was worse than calling somebody's baby ugly.

johnnymossville

A forum is never complete until the troll shows up. Heck, I enjoy hearing from them.

jrd

And, of course, no thread is complete without somebody throwing in the "troll" word, when the party line isn't being religiously observed by all contributors. But never mind. This is the best of all possible worlds and the GH4 is the best of all possible cameras.

c3hammer

@jrd what is your deal? There are no other cams that we can even compare to. A Canon 1DC at $10k? it's only advantage is exceptional low light ability. A sony FS700 at $7k? It's only advantage is 240 fps with one of least pleasing images out there. Blackmagics are nice, but they shoot blanks for a feature set and usability. Canon, Nikon and Sony have nothing in the realm. I just don't understand what you're comparing to.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

Tags in Topic

Top Posters