Answer this: If new broadcast deliverable standards demand Super35, what about MFT?

[Jack Zhang]

Had a chat with a shop selling the GH5 and I'm now hearing that to meet a proper broadcast/film deliverable, your minimum sensor size is Super35. If you submit anything for primary content channels at Discovery or the BBC, anything below Super35 will be rejected.

The GH5 is a tough pill to swallow. Cause the EVA1 has a Super35 sensor, EF mount and etc with a sane recording backend that's similar to the GH5, but those planning to shoot nature stuff for Discovery or BBC will find out that their MFT sensor is too small to deliver as a proper deliverable if they shot it in ALL-I mode or with a Ninja Inferno on a GH5 to shave some dollars off.

The shop even said that the GH5 was a "YouTube camera" that shouldn't be taken seriously for real production.

What do you all think? Are the standards too strict? Is the shop BSing? I might just look for a FS7 used and pair it with a Fujinon MK lens. I'd lose realtime HDMI out in 10bit 4:2:2 for the framerates I shoot at, but internally, it would suit my needs.

[Robert Lane]

With exception to big-budget jobs or when a client asks for a specific camera (which these days I consider those requests to be totally arrogant, ignorant or downright idiotic considering you *cannot* tell the difference on-screen anymore with LOG profiles and grading homogenizing everything), I've been using the GH5 for nearly all our productions with fabulous results. Even national campaign broadcast commercials. But to me this is no big deal: We produced similar projects on the HVX200 P2 camera back in the day...

The GH5 is in point of fact the only DSLR on the market that shoots the same codec, color space, data rate and formats as digital cinema cameras. Period. No other DSLR even comes close. And with the advent of firmware 2.2 that gap between the GH5 and it's photography-based brethren grew even wider.

The GH5 being a "YouTube" camera is total BS; that's what a salesperson says when they're keen on selling you something else - more expensive. Or they're ignorant of the full capabilities of the GH5. But as I mentioned above, the little Panny simply stands-out head-and-shoulders above any other DSLR.

The BBC's nose-to-the-clouds standards have never meant anything to me, but if you intend to submit to them or their affiliates then you just don't have any choice, you'll need to step-up. If you want to play in their sandbox, then it's by their rules.

However with a major project coming up I'm seeing the limitations of the MFT format myself, and mostly from a DOF and angle-of-view perspective. Something that S35 addresses. And, I'll be moving up to an S35 platform in the very near future and leaving behind the GH5/MFT format altogether.

To that end if you're seriously considering stepping up I can tell you with utmost certainty that the most logical step-up from the GH5/s isn't the EVA-1. Yikes, I can't believe I said that being a dedicated Panny shooter ever since P2 days, but I just got hands-on experiences with the Ursa Mini Pro, C200, EVA-1 and FS7 MkII. The clear winner was the Ursa Mini Pro - for several reasons which I won't bore you with here.

The FS7 MkII outpaces the Ursa Mini just by a slight margin - in certain areas, but I can't justify the price-point for it's output and feature set.

The simple fact is that even our venerable GH5 is limited to a 10-bit output, whether it's ALL-i or not. And when you see files from a 12-bit, 14-15 stops of dynamic range and compare it to the GH5... it's just no contest. There's simply more color information - a LOT more and it shows in color-finishing/grading.

Don't get me wrong, the EVA-1 is a great camera and because it's a Panny chipset the colors between the GH5 and it merge nicely in post. BUT, footage from the Ursa Mini Pro is just... that much more stunning. It's palpable.

Technology being what it is currently, I don't ever see a MFT camera coming close to having a 12 or even 14-bit output. It would require a much bigger heatsink on the chip than a GH5-sized body would allow. Not to mention the 50% percent crop from "full-frame".

So if you're like me and in a place that's forcing you to consider stepping up to a true digital cinema body, then take a good look at the Ursa Mini Pro. The guy "Wolfcrow" on YouTube did a fabulous job of laying out a comparison between all the sub-$10,000 s35 cameras, check it out.

[Noa Put]

Is it your intention to deliver to the BBC or discovery channel?

[Cary Knoop]

The BBC accepts DSLR as long as they "have EBU R118 test report results that meet the UHD Tier 2 or HD Tier 2L requirement".

UHD1 Tier 2 allows 10 bit sensors as small as 1/2 inch and even smaller if tested positively.

[Christopher Young]

What kills most cameras from the EBU and BBC's point of view is PSNR more than pixels and sensor size. Noise levels in images aimed at broadcast need to be tightly controlled due to the signal path losses in amplifiers, attenuators, signal splitters and combiners, lossy cables etc in the transmission path.

Tier 2 UHD requires a signal to noise ratio of 44dB at 0dB gain. The best test results I have seen from a GH5 are around 41dB which is if you understand the dB ratio curve tells us that this 3dB difference in SNR means a doubling of noise. For broadcast this is a major influence in what cameras are acceptable.

https://www.dxomark.com/panasonic-lu...in-the-lineup/

EBU Tiers here:

https://tech.ebu.ch/publications/r118

Most decent 3 chip 2/3" cameras such as a Sony PXW-400 can deliver a PSNR of up to 62 dB in the Y channel with noise suppression on. In reality as an RGB output signal this would be closer to 55-57dB. On that basis all the DSLR/mirrorless cameras are way outside the higher end tiers for broadcast acceptability. Even the venerable old Sony EX3 1/2" chip cameras delivered 54 dB in the Y channel. Canon's new C200 delivers 53dB (Typical) in 50Hz mode. Sony’s FS7-F5-F55 range deliver 57dB.

Basically if whoever you are shooting for is going to use the EBU Tier system to determine what camera level they want you to shoot with and want you to meet Tier 1 in either HD or UHD the camera needs to deliver better than 48dB. Most S35 single chip cameras need to be delivering figures well in excess of 48dB for a good SNR in a 10-bit 4:2:2 recording.

Why is this? As we can see from the table below to record a true full 10-bit image we require a dynamic range of 60dB. To deliver a full true 8-bit signal we require a dynamic range of 48dB. Cameras that deliver 10-bit 4:2:2 recordings really require a SNR of 60dB to ensure that most of the information is signal rather than noise in that 10-bit container. In practice and reality this is not the case but one cannot get away from the fact that the better the SNR is of a camera the lower will be the noise component of that signal. Quite well put here:

https://www.provideocoalition.com/s_...s_demystified/

SNR is expressed in units of power or decibels (dB).

SNR (dB) = 20log (Signal e- / Noise e-)

8-bit 256:1 48dB Dynamic Range
10-bit 1024:1 ( 4x Increase) 60dB Dynamic Range
12-bit 4096:1 (16x Increase) 72dB Dynamic Range
14-bit 16384:1 (64x Increase) 84dB Dynamic Range
16-bit 65536:1 (256x Increase) 96dB Dynamic Range

Chris Young

[Kevin Lau]

Interesting there is a little footnote on negative gain settings. That has been a debated topic in the past as to whether negative gain actually gives you more usable SNR or if it really just brings the same range, shifted down by the 3dB for example.

[Christopher Young]

True Kevin you are correct technically but in practice I've found most cameras that are capable of anything delivering around ten stops or better with a dynamic range in excess of 50dB suffer very little if anything visually when going out to a six stop Rec 709 range. I've worked on plenty of live OB's and visually seen nothing when we have tried negative gain. Sure from a post point of view the quieter the image the nicer the look generally.

Chris Young

[Jack Zhang]

Has anyone looked at the GH5s SNR numbers from both RAW bayer data and the video modes via HDMI capture?

[Paul R Johnson]

The BBC have specs for different purposes.

You are simplifying this far too much. It is not just sensor size, but the whole style and system. BBC's Marcella, for example was shot on Panasonic Varicam 35 - and there is no way in the world a production like this would have considered a DSLR as serious competition to it. There are minimum standards for technical specs for these kinds of programmes, but far more to it than just basic techniques specs. The glass on the front of the varicam, for example.

[Christopher Young]

Exactly Paul.

It was always the case with the Beeb when I trained there and basically it is still the case years later. There are certain standards they and most broadcasters have to adhere to for a number of reasons. One is that a broadcasters technical delivery requirements are based around the fact that its whole chain of delivery needs to dovetail into the interoperability requirements for the UK DTT platform. All these parameters are laid down by Ofcom in the UK.

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/consultatio...echnical-codes

With regards to DSLR, and this applies to Mirrorless as well, the BBC are quite adamant about the use of these cameras. This information can be found on page 8 of the

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION FOR THE DELIVERY OF TELEVISION PROGRAMMES AS AS - 11 FILES

This also applies to the following channels in the UK.

BBC, BT Sport, Channel 4, Channel 5, ITV, Sky, STV and TG4

As for the 60Hz world most of that is governed by SMPTE spec so that may be totally different. That said I've seen all manner of "non-broadcast" spec cameras used in all manner of broadcast productions. I do have to say though that the Beeb were always one of the toughest to get program tech clearance through. A few years back we produced a 13 ep series for Granada in the UK and whilst I always aimed for the maximum delivery quality I have rarely ever had a series accepted without some kind of a tech query but in that case all went through without a question.

My motto is if you can get a type of camera and kit or anything else accepted go for it but do your homework first. If necessary discuss with the broadcaster and submit any supporting tech material for the kit you want to use along with some footage samples If they sign off on that all well and good. If you can deliver quality like this off a GH5S I would be asking for sure:

Ettore's Stargate (The Journey of Nau-chan) on Vimeo

http://dpp-assets.s3.amazonaws.com/w...rdsBBCFile.pdf

Chris Young

[Steve Burkett]

If I was shooting for broadcast, I'd probably only have the GH5 as a B camera for shots where a smaller camera was needed. However there is plenty of video needed that is not going to end being broadcast. It's not the be all and end all of video production.
Still this story emphasises my gear buying policy of doing my own research and then buying online. Rarely do I go into a store and if I do, I don't ask the store to tell me what I should already know myself.

[Jack Zhang]

Brick and Mortar is still good for bartering. I still tend to prefer brick and mortar for demos.

As long as my SNR on the GH5s is equal or better than my EX1R, I'm satisfied.

[Kevin Lau]

Originally Posted by Jack Zhang

Brick and Mortar is still good for bartering. I still tend to prefer brick and mortar for demos.

At least you're in a place where there ARE retail stores that carry these products to check out in person!

[Paul R Johnson]

The BBC are getting into hot water by equipping their journalists with phones for video shooting. Camera people are incensed that the Beeb's own standards are perfectly bendable when immediacy triumphs over quality - even worse when many of these phones only shoot in 30 fps! On one hand they have serious and uncompromising standards for some things, yet accept mediocrity when it suits. Journalists with hand held stabilisers for iPhones!

[Andy Wilkinson]

I agree with Paul about this duality of standards in the BBC.

Was filming something in Norwich recently & I noted the BBC journalist covering the story near me had “the iPhone kit” - and he was literally surrounded by people like me shooting on far better cameras. I watched the news broadcast that night and sure enough it looked really mediocre - and jerky (no doubt because of 30fps broadcast at 50i here in PAL land).

I accept that fast breaking news will use on-the-scene viewer/public supplied phone clips - but reporters shooting pre-planned news items on iPhones is just cutting standards too far in my book/something I find disappointing. Ho hum...