Wow, I bet the GH5 reps from Panasonic are not happy. I would never form an opinion off of one review and set of tests but the rubber meeting the road does not look positive in this review. Of course, some of this could be due to early glitches that Panasonic will fix with firmware updates?

Discuss.

https://www.cinema5d.com/panasonic-gh5-lab-review-10-bit-flaws-vlog-free-gh5-lut/

It could also be the users not knowing what they were doing or trying to compare apples and oranges and draw conclusions. Not impressed and will wait for more competent review of the finished product. One thing it did show was that the GH5 is a very real competitor to products costly many times more. That of course was not stressed at all though it did score very high on lots of parameters except 10bit vlog on an unfinished product at a limited bit rate !! No mention of recording to external recorder like the Atomos Inferno that could have recorded 10 bit 60P at a high bit rate. I guess that would not have had the same impact !!! The combination of GH5 and Atomos Inferno still a lot less than either the FS7 or the Canon ? If it had performed really well at this stage of introduction ( and for me only interested in UHD 60P it did ) then both Sony and Canon should be really worried not Panasonic.

How did Cinema5D get firmware that had 10-bit 4:2:2 4K activated when that feature isn't due until "summer 2017"?

The 24p and 30p 4K samples available for download here (from Neumann Films) are also 10-bit 4:2:2. The download link for the samples is given in the video description on the YouTube page.

Panasonic Lumix GH5: Downloadable Footage - YouTube

And Neumann Films are already promoting a custom LUT's pack for the GH5; hence the sample footage for testing:

http://neumannfilms.net/?product=lumix-gh5-luts

Wow, I bet the GH5 reps from Panasonic are not happy.
Discuss.



There is not much to discuss if you actually haven't got the camera to see for yourself, over at EOSHD Andrew responded that cinema5d findings where wrong, so who to believe? This article will not stop me and I"m sure many others from getting the camera.

This is why you should never crown a camera based spec. The growing consensus I'm seeing from early reviews is the image quality gains over GH4 are very modest. Far from the fan boy hype that has been thrown around. If you were happy with the GH4 you'll be happy with the 5 but if you weren't happy with the 4 you'll most likely feel the same about the 5.

Well it depends on the features one is looking for in the GH5 I think. My only concern is UHD60P with dual SD cards slots and WIFi remote control. I have no doubt the performance will be better than my little Sony camcorders that I now use or the FDR-AX1. I see little point in comparing the GH5 to a FS7 or Canon camcorder that cost 5 times as much or more. If it gets close, as it did, then it should be Sony and Canon have the problem not Panasonic. 10 bit needs lots of data rate currently not available in the camera but of course they did not record externally with an Atomos Inferno to check whether it was the internal recording or the sensor electronics. I guess we will find out later in the year. I will not use 10 bit or Vlog for that matter so of little concern to me when mine comes the end of the month ( I hope ). UHD 60P is only 8bit internal so until I get an Atomos Inferno my recordings will all be 8bit.

Wow, I bet the GH5 reps from Panasonic are not happy. I would never form an opinion off of one review and set of tests but the rubber meeting the road does not look positive in this review. Of course, some of this could be due to early glitches that Panasonic will fix with firmware updates?

Discuss.

https://www.cinema5d.com/panasonic-gh5-lab-review-10-bit-flaws-vlog-free-gh5-lut/

Given the views you've expressed about the GH4, I shouldn't be that surprised to see you posting this article here to stir the pot a little. However the article is flawed as others have mentioned, but interesting. I shall make my own conclusions when my GH5 arrives at the end of the month.

This is why you should never crown a camera based spec. The growing consensus I'm seeing from early reviews is the image quality gains over GH4 are very modest. Far from the fan boy hype that has been thrown around. If you were happy with the GH4 you'll be happy with the 5 but if you weren't happy with the 4 you'll most likely feel the same about the 5.

Pete, you are entirely missing the point and seem to have taken some of the over-reactions in a GH5 thread to heart. Fan boy hype indeed. What I welcome on the GH5 is 60p 4K, dual card slot, 5 axis IS on a more Professional camera and better ISO performance and some improvements in auto focus. Videos I have seen have suggested I shall be rewarded with this.

I admit to also hoping for better vLog application with 10 bit 4:2:2; which I have yet to see any definite conclusions on and to be honest may only be viable once the Easter and Summer updates happen, of which no such videos exist to demonstrate. This article is in my mind too early. All it shows is that 10 bit recorded at a rather low bitrate of 150mbps could have issues. Does this surprise you?? Probably why further updates with larger bitrates are still to come.

...This article is in my mind too early. All it shows is that 10 bit recorded at a rather low bitrate of 150mbps could have issues. Does this surprise you?? Probably why further updates with larger bitrates are still to come.

Just to note also that the video stream bitrates of those 10-bit 4:2:2 sample downloads from Neumann Films are 172 Mbps for the 24p and 138 -143 Mbps for the 30p clips.

Given the views you've expressed about the GH4, I shouldn't be that surprised to see you posting this article here to stir the pot a little.

To be fair, I would post it about any camera that is so overhyped based upon specs. I did the same with the C300 MKIIs "15 stops of latitude" which I knew was not a realistic number, even though I like the camera. I bought the GH4 under almost identical circumstances, ordered it before I had ever seen or used one in real life because the specs were so incredible. If I would have had the chance to rent a GH4 before I ordered it, I never would have bought it, but I wanted to be ahead of the curve and be an early adopter on what seemed like would be a ground breaking camera. It was not. Just like I don't think the GH5 will be.

Overhyped specs are misleading. While cameras are computers with lenses these days, it seems a lot of engineering/spec/technology oriented buyers purchase cameras like they would buy a computer, merely based on processor speed, RAM, graphics cards benchmarks, etc. That's fine for computers because the software you use is what gives you the "artistic interface", lets you create and refine. Cameras, OTOH, are the "artistic interface". I will never again buy a camera based upon hyped up specs. Rent, borrow or get hands on time before you buy. Read half a dozen reviews and tests. The GH5 is cheap but add in half a dozen lenses, media, extra batteries, cases, audio interface and then you are spending some real money. I wouldn't take the Cinema 5D review as gospel. If I read three or four other reviews that support their findings, just like I did about the "15 stops of latitude" about the C300 MKII, then I would tend to believe it more.

I only posted this because the review popped up in my email and I was surprised to not see a thread over here a day later, it's all over DVXUser.

This is why you should never crown a camera based spec. The growing consensus I'm seeing from early reviews is the image quality gains over GH4 are very modest. Far from the fan boy hype that has been thrown around. If you were happy with the GH4 you'll be happy with the 5 but if you weren't happy with the 4 you'll most likely feel the same about the 5.

I agree Pete. There are plenty of people who love the GH4, the GH5 seems to be more of the same so they will undoubtedly be happy with it. I did see one feature about a year ago shot with the GH4 that looked pretty good but you could tell that it was a low budget indie that still spent a ton of money on post, it was very stylized with relatively high production values but I could not make sense of why you would spend at least $100k, possibly a lot more to make your indie feature, then shoot it on a $2k consumer camera? Just to prove a point? It wasn't shot all in cars or small spaces, it looked like a lot of tripod/dolly/gimbal with big sets, nice locations, etc. It looked nothing like anything else that I have seen shot on the GH4, it was shot in V-log and had a lot of VFX applied and obviously had been massaged with an intricate grade by a skilled colorist.

I will never again buy a camera based upon hyped up specs. Rent, borrow or get hands on time before you buy. Read half a dozen reviews and tests. The GH5 is cheap but add in half a dozen lenses, media, extra batteries, cases, audio interface and then you are spending some real money. I wouldn't take the Cinema 5D review as gospel. If I read three or four other reviews that support their findings, just like I did about the "15 stops of latitude" about the C300 MKII, then I would tend to believe it more.

I only posted this because the review popped up in my email and I was surprised to not see a thread over here a day later, it's all over DVXUser.

Well give us a chance. I only just became aware of it today when I saw it linked and debunked on EOSHD. We don't all have Cinema 5D articles beamed to our emails you know.

As for your views on specs, all that link showed was that the hype about 10 bit 4:2:2 maybe unrealistic at 150 mbps. All that article shows is that its not going to give as good an image as say a £26000 Canon C700 - wow there's a shocker.

Specs are not just about great image quality. Specs show that the GH5 has the excellent 5 axis IS that I have already used to good effect on my GX80 and G80 cameras. Specs show I will have 60p 4K for slow mo 4K footage. Specs show a dual card slot - need I go on. I appreciate there have been some over-hype, just as there was with the GH4, but it won't affect my own use of the camera when it arrives.
5 axis IS, 60p, dual card slot and all the features I have enjoyed with the GH4 are more than enough to satisfy this user.

As for costs, it is thankful I have approx £6000 worth of micro 4/3 lenses plus plenty of extra batteries, media and cases.

Finally, can I thank you for once again giving me the sad story of your GH4 experience. Reading it for the third time in so many days has been very gratifying. Have you considered selling the rights to this story. You've surely written enough on it to warrant a movie adaption.

The GH5 is cheap but add in half a dozen lenses, media, extra batteries, cases, audio interface and then you are spending some real money.

Not really, even the best and most expensive Panasonic or Olympus lenses are half the price of what comparable Sony, Canon or Nikon lenses cost. I got the 40-150mm f2.8 Olympus which is 1400 dollar, how much is a 80-300mm f2.8 full frame equivalent (if such a lens even exist) for any of the mentioned brands?

It's DMW-XLR1audio interface is only 400 dollar. You only need one spare battery as 2 will get you through an entire day of shooting, it shoots to cheap sd cards.

In real money you could say that a entire gh5 kit with several of their most expensive lenses would be about half the price of what you would have to spend otherwise.

Finally, can I thank you for once again giving me the sad story of your GH4 experience. Reading it for the third time in so many days has been very gratifying. Have you considered selling the rights to this story. You've surely written enough on it to warrant a movie adaption.

It's being shopped by CAA as we speak! ;-)

In real money you could say that a entire gh5 kit with several of their most expensive lenses would be about half the price of what you would have to spend otherwise.

But Steve in the post up above you says he has "£6000 worth of micro 4/3 lenses plus plenty of extra batteries, media and cases."?

I get what you are saying, the M43 lenses are less but I recall when I had the GH4, shopping for lenses and still going through the same financial decisions I go through now buy EOS lenses, I often cannot afford the ones I really want and I ended up buying a lot of lenses because I shoot in so many different situations and need at least half a dozen lenses. I think right now, I have 9 EOS lenses and all together, they could have almost paid for a new 4k camera. Maybe I am a lens junky? I am definitely a light junky, own far too many lights but they are generally cheaper than lenses.

I see in another thread that you are about to spend 25K on a camera and needed accessories and that's without lenses, surely Steve's 6K for a production ready set must sound like peanuts then? He didn't mention the camerabody but you currently can get a gh4 for a bit above 1K which still leaves plenty to include all lenses you need. You mention "$2k worth of new batteries" for the c300II, the battery cost alone would buy you a GH5 you know and a extra battery is 55 dollar :)

Given the views you've expressed about the GH4, I shouldn't be that surprised to see you posting this article here to stir the pot a little. However the article is flawed as others have mentioned, but interesting. I shall make my own conclusions when my GH5 arrives at the end of the month.



Pete, you are entirely missing the point and seem to have taken some of the over-reactions in a GH5 thread to heart. Fan boy hype indeed. What I welcome on the GH5 is 60p 4K, dual card slot, 5 axis IS on a more Professional camera and better ISO performance and some improvements in auto focus. Videos I have seen have suggested I shall be rewarded with this.

I admit to also hoping for better vLog application with 10 bit 4:2:2; which I have yet to see any definite conclusions on and to be honest may only be viable once the Easter and Summer updates happen, of which no such videos exist to demonstrate. This article is in my mind too early. All it shows is that 10 bit recorded at a rather low bitrate of 150mbps could have issues. Does this surprise you?? Probably why further updates with larger bitrates are still to come.
How am I missing the point? The review was about the image quality and I confined my comments to that. What would be the point of holding opinions based on speculations that they will fix issues in the future?

Months back when they released the specs one of the first comments I made was how are they fitting all the extra color data into that bit rate? Bitrate, resolution, color depth, etc don't live on their own. If you added 422 to an inexpensive consumer camera it wouldn't become a professional camera it would be a consumer camera that shoots 422. In this instance the color depth might not be what it seems.

I see in another thread that you are about to spend 25K on a camera and needed accessories and that's without lenses, surely Steve's 6K for a production ready set must sound like peanuts then? He didn't mention the camera body but you currently can get a gh4 for a bit above 1K which still leaves plenty to include all lenses you need. You mention "$2k worth of new batteries" for the c300II, the battery cost alone would buy you a GH5 you know and a extra battery is 55 dollar :)

Correction, contemplating spending $25k. I would actually much rather NOT spend $25k, that's why I am hoping for a C100 MKIII at NAB closer to $6k to $8k. Even if I had to buy new batteries and CFast cards for that camera, I could use the existing backpack, tripod, head, slider, we use for the C100 so the overall would be less than half the cost of the C300 MKII.

I'm generally of the "don't buy production gear until you have a client/job that will immediately pay for at least half of it" school. And hopefully you have others lined up who will also hire you and rent the gear so it can be paid off quickly. If I was buying a GH5 for my business today, I would still approach the buy the same way, camera, lots of recording media, extra batteries and at least half a dozen lenses, audio adapter, etc. It's a lot less than $25k but you have to realize, I am cheap. If there was a way to service all of our clients with only rentals, and not owning any camera, I would. We did that for quite a while in the F900 era, we rented all of our cameras and camera support gear, all I had was a little TRV900 Mini DV camera. But the hassle, insurance and endless trips, then courier charges to and from the rental houses was a lot of money and we couldn't be flexible and accept a job for the next day, we always had to have a few days to reserve the gear, check it out and pick it up. It's nice to just have the gear ready to go.

I owned the GH4 three years ago, business has improved since then, but I didn't buy it to save money, I bought it for 4K capability, size and weight. After I sold the GH4, I replaced it with a C100 MKI, which obviously was significantly more money when it was a current model. Yes, not happy about the inflated battery and media costs for the C300 MKII. $500.00 ea. for stock large size Canon batteries hurts when the last generation cost less than half of that. But it is what it is. If you want that camera that's what the accessories cost. Unless we land a client this year who will require 4K origination and on a regular, ongoing basis, probably will not spend the $25k. Might spend $10k to get something 4K capable though, but waiting to see what comes of NAB.

How am I missing the point? The review was about the image quality and I confined my comments to that. What would be the point of holding opinions based on speculations that they will fix issues in the future?



You're not missing the point of the review, you're missing the point on the fact that for many of us, this camera isn't about the over-hyped reactions generated on forums such as this, but the fact the camera is simply an upgrade to a system we have already invested in. Many, including yourself, talk about the GH5 specs as if the 10 bit 4:2:2 is its only feature of note and which the cameras status hangs on. In fact early buzz was more on 4K at 60p. There are many who are excited about this camera and plan to buy one who are not even planning to use 10 bit 4:2:2. I personally haven't crowned this camera based on specs. I am interested in it because it takes a camera I already own and adds some useful and much needed features.

But Steve in the post up above you says he has "£6000 worth of micro 4/3 lenses plus plenty of extra batteries, media and cases."?



Yes but this is something I have spent many years investing in. I certainly didn't start out with that. I began with a couple of lenses, a 12-35 zoom, adding a 25mm prime, then a 45mm and so on.

When the GH4 came out, I too pre-ordered it. I didn't pre-order it because it did 4K, I wasn't interested in it and in fact it took several months after owning it before I even really dabbled in it. I pre-ordered it because it was a natural upgrade to a system I had already invested in. Results, I was very happy with the camera and you were not. I'd be wary jumping into any other camera system without being fully aware of its strengths and limitations.

It's the same with the GH5. I am pre-ordering it not because of its 10 bit 4:2:2, though I am certainly intrigued to experiment with it, but because of other new features that will be very useful. Forums such as these have generated an almost hysterical over-reaction to the cameras 10 bit internal recording, and seem to expect it to mean an image quality equal to an FS7 or Canon C700, but the World doesn't work like that.

So now we can expect an equally hysterical backlash that a camera costing a fraction of the price, one limited by a smaller sensor size and body isn't going to deliver quality on par with Professional Camera bodies costing 3-4 times as much. I recall issues with the FS5 when it came out concerning log footage; issues later rectified. So this isn't anything new.

Frankly if anyone is buying for 10 bit 4:2:2 alone, they'd be wise to hold off. Those of us buying because we have already invested thousands in the micro 4/3s system will benefit the most from this new camera and be less likely to have expectations beyond the limitations of its sensor.

For my particular use 4:2:2 10 bit is of no use, most likely those that do green screen or those shooting in v-log when the camera will be capable to shoot at it's highest bitrates will be looking forward to the possibilities but for most of us it will just look cool that the camera is capable of doing this.

If you shoot weddings and plan to use v-log my only concern would be how it would match my other camera's that don't have this option and I"lm not sure if I want to go through all that hassle of bringing v-log footage back to life in post, fun maybe for a personal project but not for 8 to 10 hours of footage.

I think if I do use vlog, and actually have started to recently since I have a good LUT to use, is for moments when I am filming with a single camera, outside say during the confetti throwing in high contrast situations. I also hoped 10 bit would help with shots where banding can occur when you grade, such as dresses against a large blank wall or lots of sky. However footage I've seen suggests at least until the 400mbps upgrade, this may not be feasible. Which is fine, I've lived with it so far. I would be reluctant to use vlog for multi camera moments. Grading a whole Wedding for me would be overkill. I don't charge enough to do that.

I do have another project this year where I'd have liked to have shot in vlog and 10 bit, but I may have to think about this. Run my own tests and see if it's worth it. It's not essential for it, just desirable.

I have read some observations that the GH4 when outputting to 10 bit via an external recorder showed little gain or improvement over 8 bit. Not sure if this is so as I've never owned an external recorder. If true, though, would 10 bit internal recording behave any differently. Perhaps you need a larger camera to get the full benefit from 10 bit 4:2:2.

Still not long to release, so there'll be a lot more tests, reviews and comments to pass judgement on.

You're not missing the point of the review, you're missing the point on the fact that for many of us, this camera isn't about the over-hyped reactions generated on forums such as this, but the fact the camera is simply an upgrade to a system we have already invested in. Many, including yourself, talk about the GH5 specs as if the 10 bit 4:2:2 is its only feature of note and which the cameras status hangs on. In fact early buzz was more on 4K at 60p. There are many who are excited about this camera and plan to buy one who are not even planning to use 10 bit 4:2:2. I personally haven't crowned this camera based on specs. I am interested in it because it takes a camera I already own and adds some useful and much needed features.
In fairness I don't keep track of individuals members views, requirements, and their intended use of equipment. It doesn't sound like we are very far apart.

In fairness I don't keep track of individuals members views, requirements, and their intended use of equipment. It doesn't sound like we are very far apart.

Quite agree. Check my posts and you'll see me pouring some scorn over those posts that have labelled the GH5 as a Sony and Canon killer. It is nothing of the sort. There was always going to be the first low budget camera that would offer 60p 4K and 10 bit internal. But the first is rarely always the best and never always the last.

I bought an Atomos and have used it with a GH4 and a 5Dmkiii. I did not see enough difference to warrant the use of it to achieve higher quality. For a long running situation, like theatrical, it was great to be able to run continuously on a 500GB hard drive, then take the ProRes directly into Pr for editing. That I liked. And it did seem *a bit* better quality than the internal recordings on both cameras. It also seemed to do a slightly better job matching my C100 (from the output of the 5D).

These days, I use it mainly as a monitor for clients to watch as I'm shooting. The HDMI port is too flakey for professional use. Wiggle it and your image can go away. I'm a huge believer in SDI for all cameras I buy. I'll end up with an BM HDMI>SDI converter for some of my GH5 work, when it arrives.


I have read some observations that the GH4 when outputting to 10 bit via an external recorder showed little gain or improvement over 8 bit. Not sure if this is so as I've never owned an external recorder. If true, though, would 10 bit internal recording behave any differently. Perhaps you need a larger camera to get the full benefit from 10 bit 4:2:2.

I have a "Lockport" micro HDMI to HDMI protector/convertor on my GH4. It does the trick. GH5 full HDMI of course so perhaps no need for a protector. We'll see. (I do though prefer SDI but more HDMI in the consumer/prosumer market I suppose.)

Ron

I too found the micro-HDMI port on the GH4 led to drop outs when recording to my Atomos Shogun Inferno (not the full HDMI port on the Atomos). The GH5 has a full HDMI port and comes with a lock for that port. So does the Sony A7s ii come with a lock.

When the GH4 came out, I too pre-ordered it. I didn't pre-order it because it did 4K, I wasn't interested in it and in fact it took several months after owning it before I even really dabbled in it. I pre-ordered it because it was a natural upgrade to a system I had already invested in. Results, I was very happy with the camera and you were not. I'd be wary jumping into any other camera system without being fully aware of its strengths and limitations.


On this we definitely agree. It's the only time I ever bought a camera without trying one before buying and it was a frustrating experience. I will never do that again, too much at risk, too much hassle to go whole hog on a system only to discover it doesn't meet your and your clients expectations.

I see in another thread a few of your disappointments with the gh4 was that it had bad audio, that's like buying a dedicated videocamera and complaining it can't take any decent pictures, you can't expect high quality in-camera audio from a photocamera with videofunctionality.
Or you disliked the m4/3 dof and fov, that's because it has a smaller sensor and it's a well known fact, this again is like buying a full frame camera and complaining you hate the too narrow dof at f1.4. You can change the fov you know by using a speedbooster.
Or that you found that the lenses seemed small and cheap, here you are describing one of the m4/3 main benefits, the lenses can be made much smaller and lighter and panasonic and olympus do have some high quality glass, furthermore you can attach about any imaginable lens from almost any brand onto a m4/3 camera with the right adapter.

If you would have done your homework to find out the basics about a camera system and not have pressed that buy button based over some hype about a camera you could have saved yourself from disappointment.

Back to the GH5, some of it's improvements over the GH4 are substantial, you can have better audio quality now using the DMW-XLR1, you can shoot handheld with any non stabilized prime lens and it has codecs found back on camera's costing a lot more. Other then that the camera improves on autofocus from some comparison tests I have seen so far, they have improved the color science (something I see on my gx80 and g80) and they have improved the lowlight (also from some tests I have seen) and it will record without any limit (something panasonic already made possible for us Europeans with the gh4r and they are the only company so far that I know of that has made that change)

So to answer your question about a camera you have no interest in ever buying again, to me it's improvements are bigger then the GH3 to GH4 update was. How good it is? It will surpass my expectations and that of my clients, I"m currently happy with my gx80 and g80, even with their disadvantages and they get the job done, the GH5 will eliminate about any frustration that still is left and it will even provide features I probably never will use, like the high bitrate 10bit codecs.

This doesn't mean it's a perfect camera for video, like with any dslr on the market today, there are limitations, often intentional to protect higher end models or to just maintain a difference between dedicated video- and photocamera's, camera's like the c100, fs5 or even my never talked about gy ls300, will always have better videofunctionality because they are designed with video only in mind.

On this we definitely agree. It's the only time I ever bought a camera without trying one before buying and it was a frustrating experience. I will never do that again, too much at risk, too much hassle to go whole hog on a system only to discover it doesn't meet your and your clients expectations.

It's a matter of taste. I find the poor HD detail of the Canon 80d to be totally unacceptable, but others like yourself will have different views. I saw a recent article on the BBC News that shows they were using the GH4 to conduct discreet Interviews in China. The GH4 has been used on Top Gear to name just 1 of the TV Productions that have found a good use for the camera. In fact I've seen and heard of more cases of the GH4 being used in Professional TV Productions than say the 80d or even the C100 (where the C300 is preferred for obvious reasons).

So whilst the GH4 and GH5 are not cameras you would personally use or rate highly, they do have their fans and I expect the GH5 to be similarly popular amongst many Professionals looking for a small light weight camera with great features.

Yes colour won't be as good out of the box as say Canon, low light won't top fullframe and 10 bit 4:2:2 won't look as good as say the Sony FS7 or Canon C700. However for those willing to accept some compromises, the camera offers a great deal to the Video Professionals. Just not to you obviously. :)

Well it seems the Review has generated some controversy (there's a shocker). In response, there's to be a statement by Panasonic later this week according to the below article.

http://www.43rumors.com/cinema5d-gh5-test-controversy-panasonic-will-issue-an-official-statement-to-us-later-this-week/

Any of you actually handled and used a GH5?

Ron

Why? Is there anything specific you want to know?

Any of you actually handled and used a GH5?

Ron

Got mine on pre-order. I'm not one for hand holding a camera from some showroom. The only way to assess a camera is on a job. When I've shot a couple of Weddings, then I can tell you more. Another month and I hope to have more to say.

Well now it seems the original Cinema 5d review that was linked here at the start of this thread has been taken down by the author. It's certainly generated a fair bit of controversy. With many arguing the test was flawed.

I've heard back from Jessops who can't confirm my delivery except to say end of March. Looking forward to testing this camera myself when I do finally get my hands on it. It's rare these days with so many camera models out there from different manufacturers, for a camera to generate so much hysteria.

Compres all levels to grey and think you can get it back again - That really needs some bits. I still have not figured out the reason for V-log....

Good (but a bit long) podcast with cameralabs about the GH5, something interesting he mentions is that you can preset 3 focus points and let the camera toggle between one of these 3 which allow very precise and repeatable rack focusing without any hunting..

https://youtu.be/kh-HctljNj4

Got my GH5 last Monday. I shot a lot with it this week, stills and video, and for the most part I love it. I shot my video exclusively 8bit 60 150mb. Why?

Well, I tried the 10bit 150 at 24p right out of the box in low light (bedroom/living room with compact fluorescent lamps). The artifacting was insane, so bad I thought the camera might be broken. I never even got to color grading, these were big square compression blocks appearing and disappearing all across the image straight after download off the memory card. I have fast U3 Kensington cards, and the camera never complained about write performance, so my assumption is one of two things:

- 10bit internal recording is sort of a joke. It's simply too much data for too little storage bandwidth, at least in this first firmware release.
- In low light, the 10bit compression utterly falls apart. Mind you, 8bit looked fine in the same low light, even at 60p.

So to actually shoot at 10bit with a GH5, I expect to do so over HDMI to something like an Atomos Ninja Inferno.

Otherwise, the camera is stellar and a big improvement over the GH4.

Got my GH5 last Monday. I shot a lot with it this week, stills and video, and for the most part I love it. I shot my video exclusively 8bit 60 150mb. Why?

Well, I tried the 10bit 150 at 24p right out of the box in low light (bedroom/living room with compact fluorescent lamps). The artifacting was insane, so bad I thought the camera might be broken. I never even got to color grading, these were big square compression blocks appearing and disappearing all across the image straight after download off the memory card. I have fast U3 Kensington cards, and the camera never complained about write performance, so my assumption is one of two things:

- 10bit internal recording is sort of a joke. It's simply too much data for too little storage bandwidth, at least in this first firmware release.
- In low light, the 10bit compression utterly falls apart. Mind you, 8bit looked fine in the same low light, even at 60p.

So to actually shoot at 10bit with a GH5, I expect to do so over HDMI to something like an Atomos Ninja Inferno.

Otherwise, the camera is stellar and a big improvement over the GH4.

What computer did you do this on, software, CPU and speed of drives. Looks like a computer issue rather than the GH5. Only got mine Friday afternoon so not lots of testing yet but UHD 60P at 150Mbps works fine in both EDIUS 8.3 and Vegas 14. I do not use 24P but will try to see if I get the same problem.

EDIT: Just checked and 23.98P UHD 10bit 4:2:2 plays fine in EDIUS WG 8.3 no blocking etc, does not play in VEGAS 14 just get a green screen and audio. Not sure if this is because of 10 bit or a 4:2:2 source or whatever will investigate.

Computer is a 2016 MacBook Pro 15" running the latest macOS Sierra 10.12.4 and Final Cut Pro 10.3.2. I'll do a quick outdoor natural light test in UHD 60P 150Mbps 10bit and let you know what I see.

Can you show the problem by placing a video on vimeo or youtube?

Well, I tried the 10bit 150 at 24p right out of the box in low light (bedroom/living room with compact fluorescent lamps). The artifacting was insane, so bad I thought the camera might be broken. I never even got to color grading, these were big square compression blocks appearing and disappearing all across the image straight after download off the memory card. I have fast U3 Kensington cards, and the camera never complained about write performance, so my assumption is one of two things:

- 10bit internal recording is sort of a joke. It's simply too much data for too little storage bandwidth, at least in this first firmware release.
- In low light, the 10bit compression utterly falls apart. Mind you, 8bit looked fine in the same low light, even at 60p.

So to actually shoot at 10bit with a GH5, I expect to do so over HDMI to something like an Atomos Ninja Inferno.

Otherwise, the camera is stellar and a big improvement over the GH4.
When they first released the specs I was sure that 10bit at that bitrate was false advertising. That's what I call selling cameras on specs.

So you say its a big improvement over the GH4. How so? Low light performance? Image quality?

Can you show the problem by placing a video on vimeo or youtube?

No, but I'm attaching grab of playback in FCP two frames showing the problem. Alas, the problem persists in well-lit daylight.

The first shows the issue (check the upper right of the image and note the block compression artifacts). The second shows the very next frame with no artifacts.

This is UHD 23.98 150Mbps 10bit. It may be that Apple does not yet understand what Panasonic is doing with its GH5 compression. The .MOV files are unplayable in Quicktime player, though they do import and play back in FCP.

When they first released the specs I was sure that 10bit at that bitrate was false advertising. That's what I call selling cameras on specs.

So you say its a big improvement over the GH4. How so? Low light performance? Image quality?

Yes, low light is far better, though it was terrible/unusable with the GH4 and now borderline passable in a crunch. Not having a crop makes it feel less constricted and more cinematic with my lenses. The screen is great, the build and feel are top-shelf, I like having two cards, battery life still above average, stills just seem to have more life and pop and vividness than the drab stills from the GH4.

No, but I'm attaching grab of playback in FCP two frames showing the problem. Alas, the problem persists in well-lit daylight.

The first shows the issue (check the upper right of the image and note the block compression artifacts). The second shows the very next frame with no artifacts.

.

That is nasty looking.

Yeah as I said, I didn't even bother with it when I took the camera on a casual shoot.

Looks like one of two things:

- 10bit on the GH5 is broken/garbage.
- Apple can't yet properly play back/understand 10bit .MOV files from the GH5.

Have you heard more about these artifacts from other users? I did hear more about Apple users having issues with the GH5 10 bit codec though.

No, but I haven't looked around much. It's such a glaring problem that I'm having a hard time believing Panasonic shipped this feature. Did they think no one would notice all sorts of blocks and video-wrecking glitches?

This isn't pixel peeping after color grading. This is right out of the camera junk video.

If it's working for people on other NLEs then Apple needs to get on it.

What you also could do is film a few seconds of footage where you see the artifacts and make the file that is on the card available for download for others to check or you can send it to me via wetransfer, if you want I can check it on my pc, I'm using edius, it would make clear if it's a camera or softwareproblem.

Yes, good idea, will try to do this tomorrow as I'm heading out for the evening.