Gh5 firmware 2,0

[Alex Anderson]

Now that this new firmware is out and people have had some time to do some tests to evaluate the new 400 mbs, can anyone honestly say they really do see a difference in 4k 10 bit 422 at 400 mbs for most average styles of shooting and post? Also, can anyone honestly say they see a difference between the 8 bit 420? I understand that there is a more data for extreme color grading/correction, but if we shoot in camera close to what we want or just do a small amount of color grading/correction, do you still think we need the 10 bit 422 at 400 mbs?

[Steve Burkett]

Be fair Alex, its only been a few days with the new update to make any snap judgements one way or another. Besides what do you call minimum colour grading. I find 8 bit calls apart even with the application of 1 LUT.

What do you call average shooting, please define?

All-Intra has a few advantages over Long Gop. It is easier to edit with as it requires less processing power to playback in software. Detail in motion can be better recorded due to individual frames being recorded rather than multiple frames. So if you're moving the camera a lot, motion cadence can be better. Further tests will have to be done to fully demonstrate how much an improvement this brings. However static scenes would hardly yield much improvement. I plan to record a few scenes soon in the new codec and see how it looks. Obviously shooting 10 bit gives us the HLG picture profile not available in 8 bit. I'm looking forward to seeing how that works. Again it'll be several weeks, maybe a month or so before I can make any firm conclusions as to the full benefits of the various codecs on offer with the GH5.

I frankly think its too soon for anyone to honestly say if they see a difference. You say we've had sometime to do some tests. Really!! 2 days is sometime for you. I've still not got past testing my cards on how it holds on recording 400Mbps, let alone playing back and grading the damn thing. :)

[Alex Anderson]

Steve, I know it has been out for a few days and I do not think I am being unfair. I would bet many people started testing the minute they installed it and can see within minutes after getting some new footage. Not days weeks or months. The question of "is there any difference with 400mbs" has been on evryone's mind. If it's too early, then I don't mind waiting. .

I consider a few few tweaks, like contrast, saturation, hue and levels as minimum color work like we have been doing for many years compared to heavy color work like in Resolve and applying masks and so one to every shot. I consider average shoots like home videos, weddings, docs, etc compared to full blown productions for full length movies heading to theater release.

I really do not want to debate anything except hear from users of the GH5 " yes it is much better or no, there is no visible difference". If you need weeks or months to do tests, then we all can wait to hear your verdict. Let's hear from others when they come to a decision to my original question. There was no need for you to start questioning when I ask my question or what I consider minimum color work or average shooting. My question was only about "do you see a difference" and the only answers that apply are yes or no. If anyone needs more time, then take the time and reply after a personal decision.

FTR- I have already seen on other forums and web pages people talking about this and what they think. A google search helps.

Originally Posted by Steve Burkett

Be fair Alex, its only been a few days with the new update to make any snap judgements one way or another. Besides what do you call minimum colour grading. I find 8 bit calls apart even with the application of 1 LUT.

What do you call average shooting, please define?

All-Intra has a few advantages over Long Gop. It is easier to edit with as it requires less processing power to playback in software. Detail in motion can be better recorded due to individual frames being recorded rather than multiple frames. So if you're moving the camera a lot, motion cadence can be better. Further tests will have to be done to fully demonstrate how much an improvement this brings. However static scenes would hardly yield much improvement. I plan to record a few scenes soon in the new codec and see how it looks. Obviously shooting 10 bit gives us the HLG picture profile not available in 8 bit. I'm looking forward to seeing how that works. Again it'll be several weeks, maybe a month or so before I can make any firm conclusions as to the full benefits of the various codecs on offer with the GH5.

I frankly think its too soon for anyone to honestly say if they see a difference. You say we've had sometime to do some tests. Really!! 2 days is sometime for you. I've still not got past testing my cards on how it holds on recording 400Mbps, let alone playing back and grading the damn thing. :)

[Steve Burkett]

Well from the little comments I have read, there is a difference, but I am not sure that post on Facebook or even anything searched via Google are pretty reliable. :) . Personally I prefer to record with the new codec on a variety of situations and jobs, and spend time with the footage before making judgement. I would question the opinions on anyone who feel they can reliably comment on the new codec so soon after installing the firmware. Most are still trying to find reliable cards to record it without it timing out or dropping frames.

That said, if anyone has already done extensive tests, filmed a few average shoots with the new codec and done some basic colour grading, I would be interested in the feedback. I'm hoping to test it this weekend, but a busy workload means I may not be able to fully explore it till all my Wedding shoots tail off and give me some down time to play with the footage. :)

[Gary Huff]

Originally Posted by Steve Burkett

I would question the opinions on anyone who feel they can reliably comment on the new codec so soon after installing the firmware.

I can reliably comment on the new codec because it isn't new. It's similar to the C300 Mark II, in that it's H.264 LongGOP vs Intra. The bitrate is even the same at 4K. You don't see a visual difference. The difference is that you trade-off larger file sizes for ease of editing. You'll hit motion judder before you hit any kind of issue with LongGOP codecs.

[Alex Anderson]

Thanks Steve. I look forward to your findings after you have had more time with it.

Gary, I am wondering about the 400mbs making a big difference compared to shooting 4k shot at 8 bit, 420 around 100 or so mbs. Not counting the color grading or green screen benefits. Can professionals see any difference.

[Phil Lee]

Hi Alex

The difference is going to be subtle if at all, and even then it will only be seen on the original files. Any delivery of the finished output will be GOP anyway I would think, undoing any benefits of motion cadence if they were visible to start with.

It's more about helping the edit, competing with other cameras (the numbers game), and making the camera more film like in operation, even if in principal it's not make much difference.

Also it should be noted that Long GOP on the GH5 isn't really Long GOP, it's just GOP, its group of pictures just covers one second (so 24 or 60 in a group) whereas Long GOP used to be used to describe much more compressed internet streamed video which could see a group of pictures being 250 or more and so has a bad reputation. At 150Mbits/sec at 4K with a GOP stretching just 1 second on modern processors like in the GH5 is pretty good, and the codec can encode the first I frame in a GOP at quality much above that used on All-Intra for every single frame. All-Intra is extremely wasteful of bandwidth.

Regards

Phil

[Cliff Totten]

If you are shooting a rec709-ish profile in thr camera and it's 98% the look you want, than just shoot 8bit 100mbp/s..

I have found that the 10bit 150mbp/s CODEC breaks like a cheap wine glass when using VLog in it. When normalizing VLog to rec709 the shadows macro block quickly and blue sky gradients block up pretty nasty. Even motion studders too much.

Remember, h.264 will sacrifice the shadows first to protect the mid tones.

Unfortunaty, the 10bit 150mbp/s CODEC is waaaay too compressed. It has the burden of twice the chroma resolution and arround 40 times more color palette and it's only got a 50mbp/s increase to carry all of that. So, when h.264 gets stressed by its bitrate ceiling, you begin to block up in the dark elements first. Those pixels get grouped into larger and larger clusters with single color values.

So far, the 400mbps holds strong. I have only about 1 hour of VLog footage testing with it but its looking pretty durable so far. Even motion looks smoother too. I think that 10bit 400mbps will be the "go to" codec for VLog and 8bit 100 for "general purpise" rec709 stuff.

Im staying away from that 150 CODEC. Its just too fragile for VLog.

[Gary Huff]

Originally Posted by Alex Anderson

Gary, I am wondering about the 400mbs making a big difference compared to shooting 4k shot at 8 bit, 420 around 100 or so mbs. Not counting the color grading or green screen benefits. Can professionals see any difference.

A blind A/B comparison between the exact same shots in 4K 8-bit 4:2:0 100Mbps and 4K 10-bit 4:2:2 400Mbps would not be something you could pick out with a higher accuracy than pure chance.

Canon EOS C100 AVCHD and ProRes 4:2:2 HQ Comparison on Vimeo

Originally Posted by Phil Lee

it should be noted that Long GOP on the GH5 isn't really Long GOP, it's just GOP

According to Panasonic, it's Long-GOP. It even says in the camera when you pick the mode.

Originally Posted by Cliff Totten

I have found that the 10bit 150mbp/s CODEC breaks like a cheap wine glass when using VLog in it.

Which completely belies practically every one else's use of it, including my own. Do you have examples of the 150Mbps codec (it's not an acronym, it's a portmanteau) breaking in Vlog? How were you exposing?

When normalizing VLog to rec709 the shadows macro block quickly and blue sky gradients block up pretty nasty.

Using a LUT? Which one? How were you grading it?

Even motion studders too much.

That means you were panning or tilting too fast for 24p.

[Steven Schuldt]

So far I'm really loving the new 400mbps ALL-I. It should be noted that I'm using an ADATA V90 256GB SDXC I picked up at Amazon, so that makes two success stories with that brand of V90 card.

As far as what the utility is of this kind of heavy bit-rate, that depends on the shoot. I think for most projects it may well be best to shoot 60p or 24p 8bit and use a profile very close to what you want your finished product to look like. I do think this is fine for street shooting, weddings, many documentaries, home movies.

For Indie film, however, I don't think it's appropriate. I had a lot of trouble with compression artifacts shooting 150Mbps 10bit, so the new codec is very exciting as in my tests so far there have been no visible artifacts. I think the best use of this mode for Indies is when shooting certain scenes guerilla/stealth on a production that is otherwise capturing to something like a Ninja Inferno. For that, it's pretty ideal.

Also, I'm wondering what the case would be (if any) for choosing to shoot with the Hybrid Log Gamma profile over VLog. 10bit VLog footage can be mastered to HDR by HDR production services, correct? If so, what is HLG for? Can any grading gurus set me straight on this? Thanks!

[Gary Huff]

Originally Posted by Steven Schuldt

I'm wondering what the case would be (if any) for choosing to shoot with the Hybrid Log Gamma profile over VLog. 10bit VLog footage can be mastered to HDR by HDR production services, correct?

HLG is to give you finished SDR/HDR footage without having to always grade from log into both.

[Steven Schuldt]

Originally Posted by Gary Huff

HLG is to give you finished SDR/HDR footage without having to always grade from log into both.

Almost makes sense... though I'm guessing my editor (Final Cut Pro X) would need to explicitly support it, otherwise it's going to simply treat it as a 10bit 709 color space. Is that right?

[Gary Huff]

Originally Posted by Steven Schuldt

Almost makes sense... though I'm guessing my editor (Final Cut Pro X) would need to explicitly support it, otherwise it's going to simply treat it as a 10bit 709 color space. Is that right?

I don't know if it would treat it as Rec.709 or not. I would say that, from what I've read, it seems that the end device needs to support HLG. So if you're just planning on going to YouTube, as long as you keep HLG intact throughout the chain, it should be fine. UHD Blu-ray or other devices using HDR10 or Dolby Vision, not so much.

[Cary Knoop]

Originally Posted by Gary Huff

HLG is to give you finished SDR/HDR footage without having to always grade from log into both.

Right, HLG is an alternative to Rec.709 not to V-Log.

[Vishal Jadhav]

Tried both the versions in 4k and simply recorded wildlife with both for 10 second clips and i do not find any difference, the 10 bit on both ensures that they hold during editing.
i have not done any big stress tests with heavy Post processing and applying multiple LUTs so thats one i wont be able to comment.
However for everything the older format at 10 bit should be good to go.