Re: Gh5 firmware 2,0
 

I was using fast U3 SanDisk Extreme Pro cards, FWIW, which were more or less the fastest cards available at the time, and never had a problem with them in any use case save for when I tested the new ALL-I last week and the camera balked after 10 seconds or so of recording. I've since moved up to V90 cards.

I disagree about corruption of information written to the card. If that were the case the artifacts should have appeared randomly as opposed to appearing almost exclusively in certain areas like the stucco wall, which the codec seemed to have particular problems with.

These files came out of the "original media" folder of a FCPX library, which I took to be exactly that: the original media. I have no other copies. It is likely Apple tagged the footage with metadata, though it should not have altered it. I didn't write Final Cut though, so not sure. As ever, I have no idea if Apple or Panasonic was the source of those artifacts. I only know that I considered them unacceptable and hence any footage shot in 10-bit mode unusable. All 8-bit modes were artifact-free.

Also, I have never installed the VLog upgrade on my GH5, and usually shoot in Cinelike D, which I'm almost certain is the photo style that was used for these clips, as I was testing the camera for my own indie film use (10-bit, DCI 4K, 23.97, Cinelike D)

One possibility is that internally, Panasonic never tested 10-bit very much using photo styles other than VLog. Maybe if I'd had the VLog upgrade these artifacts would never have appeared. If that's the case it's still a bad experience for the customer, as I briefly considered having the camera serviced as it appeared possibly broken somehow as this was a rather simple test of advertised features.

Re: Gh5 firmware 2,0
 

But that is not at all what codec breakdown looks like.

You should have mentioned that, as it's very pertinent. I have had Final Cut mess up footage after ingest. So the footage isn't straight off the card then, it came from a drive which it was ingested onto. This doesn't rule out corruption of the footage.

Which version of Final Cut Pro X did you use?

That wouldn't make any difference, but you've already indicated you don't know what visual artifacts a stressed codec produces, so this surmising isn't surprising.

Re: Gh5 firmware 2,0
 

What exactly do you think are you defending here? Panasonic's honor? I already said I had no idea if this was an Apple or a Panasonic problem. Desperate claims about "stressed codecs" and problems with perfectly fine capture cards are worth less than nothing, help nothing, illuminate nothing, achieve nothing, other than to demonstrate what a petty, weird jerk you are.

Re: Gh5 firmware 2,0
 

What exactly do you think you're attacking here? You don't know what codec breakdown looks like, so you're spreading FUD via ignorance. Does that not concern you in the slightest?

Not until after you conveniently left out the fact that this was a file ingested from FCPX.

Since you left out the fact that this clip was not straight off the card, and instead from a drive where it had been ingested with FCPX, I had to resort to eliminating potential causes. If you had been truthful from the get-go, I wouldn't have had to ask, now would I?

You're the one claiming the LongGOP codec was worthless, which isn't true. Thus, you're contributing nothing of value. If it was something to consider as a general rule, then you should be able to point out the issues with the EVA1 shorts in a way that demonstrates where LongGOP broke down on those visuals, yet you haven't done that yet, nor will you.

If you really want to put the nail in the coffin, I can emulate exactly what you shot, and share the footage straight off the card, and it won't have those issues at all. Care to put some money down on that test beforehand? Let's say, $100 says that I can shoot similar stucco apartments on a sunny day in DCI 4K 10-bit 4:2:2 LongGOP using the same settings and lens and it won't have the corruption on it. Deal?

Re: Gh5 firmware 2,0
 

PUH-LEEZE keep it civil. Some posts edited for language. Thread stays open but argue the topic, not each other. Thanks in advance.

Re: Gh5 firmware 2,0
 

I've had much success with both codecs. I haven't found either to be an issue.
I shot this review with 10 bit UHD All-Intra. Edited so much better on my older Mac Pro. With Long GOP I have to use proxy mode.

Re: Gh5 firmware 2,0
 

No problems here either.

Re: Gh5 firmware 2,0
 

This EVA1 short (granted, 16:9 UHD instead of DCI 4K) was shot with the same exact LongGOP codec (150Mbps) in full Vlog (not the 12-stop constrained Vlog-L variety), *and* uses a hazer for the radio station scenes. If anything is going to break LongGOP, this is it.

Re: Gh5 firmware 2,0
 

Im really not sure why Panasonic chose these 150Mbp/s specs for this 10bit 4:2:2 CODEC.

Campared to the 8bit 100mbp/s 4:2:0 cousin, the 150 has the burden of TWICE the chroma resolution and arround 40 times larger color palette....and all it was given was 50 additional megabits?

Ironically, the compression ratio is WORSE on the 150 than it is on the 100. ( strictly mathematically speaking)

I did some of my own blue sky tests using the 150 and VLog. I graded it to 709 and let me tell you, it didnt just "band" in any way, it downright "macro-blocked" badly in the gradient blue shades. For me, that 150 broke like a cheap wine glass. The same exact shot with ProRes over HDMI was bulletproof. I pushed that ProRes WAY harder and got ZERO artifacts.

Its being said that all three Panasonic demo videos used the 150 CODEC. And people wonder why there are so many issues with it? Mitch Gross of Panasonic of all people, fully understands the value of shooting ProRes over massively compressed long GOP. He spent years ar Convergent Design explaining this to everybody.

For me, after what I have seen that 150 do?...im never using it with VLog. Im OK with 100, 8bit for CineD or Natural 709-ish profiles and will only shoot VLog on ProRes or internal 400 All-I.

Re: Gh5 firmware 2,0
 

What issues are those exactly?

Re: Gh5 firmware 2,0
 

Check the comments under every video. You will see quite a huge number of negative observations from a wide range of people. Its important to note that of the few EVA1's in circulation right now, Panasonic has recently placed a mandatory halt on anybody releasing footage from their evaluation unit. It seems that maybe Panasonic has taken the high amount of negative feedback to heart and are making changes to answer the critics? I have a slight "wild" hunch that the EVA1 might be delayed to rework some of the noise reduction processing? I dont know, we'll see. If I were Panasonic, I REALLY would not release this camera without the 400mbp/s All-I CODEC on day 1.

Re: Gh5 firmware 2,0
 

The extra 50 mbps should pretty much cover it.

Each UHD 10 bit 4:2:2 frame before encoding requires only 1.667 times the space compared to an 8 bit 4:2:0 frame. The ratio between 150/100 is only 1.5 but a 10 bit resolution actually compresses better than an 8 bit resolution.

Also 4:2:2 should compress fine because remember that the original pre de-Bayered data from the sensor only requires half the space compared to the de-Bayered data.

Re: Gh5 firmware 2,0
 

I have. The Vimeo versions. The versions that didn't get screwed up with the encoding like what happened on YouTube. Do you subscribe to the idea that YouTube is the best representation of uploaded material? It was explicitly stated in the roadshow last night that the YouTube versions didn't looks as nice as the Vimeo. Have you checked the comments on the Vimeo versions? Which comment are you referring to exactly?

That change would be introducing Intra earlier than next year. That's not the case.

I'll be you $50 that the camera will be shipping at the end of this month.

But it will be and people will shoot some nice content in LongGOP.

So far, the only sample showing LongGOP issues didn't actually show issues with LongGOP. It showed corruption on the clip, after being ingested via FCPX. How about we see your clip that "breaks like glass"?

Re: Gh5 firmware 2,0
 

Right!

Or use 200Mbps H.265 using 4992 X 3744 in 10 bit!

Re: Gh5 firmware 2,0
 

I'll do you one better.

From "Radio 88" on YouTube.

Here's a helpful tidbit: LongGOP doesn't make more noise. In fact, if LongGOP wasn't up to snuff, the noise would break it.

"Motion echoes" is not a real thing. Noise is, once more for emphasis, not a codec breaking. Image doesn't look soft, I saw it both projected and on an HDR 4K display.

Not the right comments? Then find one yourself and point it out. This is from Radio 88, the short I was most impressed with. Also, the hazer, as I have mentioned before, should stress the LongGOP codec. So I have linked to the short on Vimeo, and here it is on YouTube:


Can you point out directly where the LongGOP 150Mbps codec causes problems?