GH5 for video documentaries: some questions please.

[Pete Cofrancesco]

Originally Posted by Ron Evans

You can look at Adriano's WEB site to see the sort of video he shoots. He travels light I am sure since these places are remote. I think to improve over his current work will require more effort than an automatic camera. In focus and well exposed the AX100 produces nice video. Not sure what improvements he is looking for in a new camera. However one that is easy to use in his environment is the issue for him. I think he has to decide whether he wants the convenience of a camcorder or the control in a higher end camera with multiple lenses etc. He has not raised the issue of whether he is trying to meet a spec for sale of his video for instance which would have a definite influence on equipment choice both for video and audio.

You seldom can have everything you want. He has to decided what he really needs. Might have to live without the zoom to get the other advantages and learn to use a more complex camera. There are more fully featured professionals camcorders but they don’t perform that much better in low light until you spend a boat load more cash on something like the FS7.

edit: I looked at his videos and they seem fine. Most of them are outdoors with plenty of light but inside the huts a dslr/mirrorless would provide better low light performance. I can see why he wants compact and easy to use. I’d also be leary of using anything that’s not weather sealed or expensive without insurance or swapping lenses in jungle conditions like that. He also does a lot of hand held so stabilizing would be important.

I think any camera without a viewfinder would be difficult to film in the sun. Honestly I would keep the ax100 for outdoor and get a dslr/mirrorless for indoors. Although i’m not sure the gains would warrant the cost and hassle of two separate cameras.

[Ron Evans]

The GH5 is weather sealed so fits that requirement and outdoors he does not use really long zooms but to get better inside the huts would require a lens change as Noa points out to a fast wide lens. So I think a GH5 system would be at least 2 lenses and variable ND filter for the outdoor lens. Not quite a point and shoot system. The GH5 has the advantage of under controlled conditions one can set up and save all the settings to C1,2 3 etc so only a twist of the control wheel will get all the settings previously set up. Maybe the new GH5S or whatever it is going to be called may fit the bill even with a 12-60 lens. We will find that out on the 8th Jan.

[Adriano Moroni]

I don't sell my videos. They are all for me. I like to be a field operative guy. Sometimes I make public video projections. I need a good image quality and to get the best video with my budget. Sometime I am able to do it but sometime it is very hard for me. My trips are so hard and sometime my mind pulses messing with a lot of tiredness and with hot weather. Recenttly I forgot to activate ND filter on my AX100 and I got a bad video. My thecinique and my bad method sometime let me to shot good videos but sometimes also bad videos.
I know that I should learn more about my AX100 to allow me to configure better my videocamera. I understand it but I like all my focus to be above all on my trip. For this reason I like to shot in Auto mode especially because I don't have sufficient time to take some points in their life that run fast in those villages.
I know there are no cameras that work well without config. them. For example some days ago I had to shot black people on the orange earth in Africa at 1:00 pm. It was very hard for me and for my camera.
But now I know I have to change my mind.
I thank you for your suggestions.

PS: I have just watched these 2 videos on Internet. They are about GH5 autofocus. In your opinion are they real info?

GH5 vs A6500 Autofocus Comparison - 4K & 1080P - YouTube

GH5 Firmware V2.0 Autofocus - Did it improve? Panasonic GH5 Autofocus Test and V1 Comparison - YouTube

[Noa Put]

Originally Posted by Pete Cofrancesco

My beef is with people who make unqualified statements about this camera is good or bad.

That was the reason why I reacted to your "micro 4/3 is terrible compared to full frame" comment unless I misunderstood you, "full frame" alone does not automatically mean better low light performance compared to smaller sensor size camera's, if that alone was the reason all full frame cameras would perform equally.

In your opinion are they real info

Yes this is reliable info, as said before by others including me, the gh5 doesn't have reliable autofocus and would be useless in your case, that's why you need to find another camera since autofocus seems to be a keyfeature for your purpose . Your "must have" option list will have to be adjusted, you can't have it all without either pay the price with a camera like a canon c200 or loose a few options like having no 4K50p but have good autofocus (sony a6500) or bad autofocus and 4K50p (gh5).
Also consider that autofocus with a a6500 could also be hit and miss, especially with fast lenses, the shallower your dof becomes the more trickier focussing will become and the autofocus system can be fooled as well.

If I was in your situation I would stay with smaller sensor and handicam like camera's, sony had their ax100 succesor announced recently (don't know the exact name of the camera) but from what I have heared the camera is supposed to have improved autofocus and low light performance so that might be your best bet.

[Ron Evans]

The AX700 is an updated version of the AX100 with new sensor and better autofocus so will have the same auto features you are used to on the AX100. It also has log gammas to get HDR too. But is only UHD 25/30P so off my list. As I mentioned the Canon competitor would be the GX10 that has 50/60P UHD also 800% gamma for HDR. Lots of people look for the shallow depth of field film look that requires a lot of effort to get correct. I think your application like my theatre shoots is more interested in the opposite of most things being in sharp focus. A smaller sensor and stopped down iris is more appropriate to get most things in focus and is easier on the auto systems too especially focus if you are at a higher frame rate.

[Harry Pallenberg]

Adriano,

Caio. I took a look at some of your videos - very interesting. It would seem to me that you should get a camcorder not a camera that shoots video. I think something like the Canon XF400 or Panasonic HC-X1
would be best for you and the kind of shooting you do.

Off topic - Where in Italy are you from? One set of my grandparents are from Porto Ercole, the other from Milano. I am looking to travel to Brazil to work on a film about lost tribes in June 2018. I'd love to talk.
Please email me harry @ sunnyandmildmedia.com

[Adriano Moroni]

Originally Posted by Harry Pallenberg

Adriano,
Off topic - Where in Italy are you from? One set of my grandparents are from Porto Ercole, the other from Milano. I am looking to travel to Brazil to work on a film about lost tribes in June 2018. I'd love to talk.

I have just sent an email.

Originally Posted by Ron Evans

The AX700 is an updated version of the AX100 with new sensor and better autofocus so will have the same auto features you are used to on the AX100. It also has log gammas to get HDR too. But is only UHD 25/30P so off my list. As I mentioned the Canon competitor would be the GX10 that has 50/60P UHD also 800% gamma for HDR. Lots of people look for the shallow depth of field film look that requires a lot of effort to get correct. I think your application like my theatre shoots is more interested in the opposite of most things being in sharp focus. A smaller sensor and stopped down iris is more appropriate to get most things in focus and is easier on the auto systems too especially focus if you are at a higher frame rate.

Your suggestions are immensely appreciated. I will think about them or I will wait for better cameras in the new year. AX700 has many better options than AX100 but maybe the image quality was not improved in a conspicuous way.

[Bryan Worsley]

If it helps there's a series of test videos on this YouTube channel comparing the Sony AX100, AX700 and Canon GX10:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCB9...khKBzp9QP7_kvQ

Unless you can read Japanese it's difficult to know how the recordings were processed in post but with this one comparing the AX700 shot in SDR mode at 4K30p (100Mbps) and GX10 in Standard mode at 4K60p (150Mbps) it's reasonable to suppose that the AX700 4K30p footage was edited on a 2160/60p timeline, or exported as such:

YouTube (Short URL)

[Noa Put]

I have watched that comparison video in 4K on a 4k pc screen and the sony deals better with highlights, is more detailed and had better stabilization, the differences are more subtle but if I had to choose between both camera I'd take the Sony over the Canon.

[Pete Cofrancesco]

Based on the video I didn’t see anything that jumped out at me although youtube isn’t the best way to judge. Only thing I could see was the sony was cooler in midtones.

[Cliff Totten]

The GH5 should out perform the smaller Sony 1 inch-type sensor in low light. I have not put my GH5 and NX80 or Z150 side by side yet but from using them I fully expect the GH5's larger sensor and same pixel count to beat them. Remember, the GH5 uses Sony EXMOR technology with that Sony IMX272 MFT sensor.

Somebody up top said it best though, your scene lighting and presentation will have WAY more influence on your overall quality than your camera.

[Noa Put]

Based on the video I didn’t see anything that jumped out

I have watched this comparison video in 4K on a 43 inch 4K pc screen and eventhough you can see youtube added compression you can see that the sony performs better, I have added one 4K screengrab and just watch the lights on top that have the advertising printed on it, second framegrab is a part of an image blow up to see the difference in detail.
Sony probably has some incamera sharpening going on because it looks there are some extra pixelation artifacts visible round edges which the canon doesn't show so you might get equal or better results if you sharpen the canon in post but since we don't have access to the files straight from the card we"ll never know. One thing I do see clearly is that the sony "appears" to be more detailed.
Also the stabilization difference is best seen on a big screen, it is a subtle difference but it is better on the Sony.

[Noa Put]

The first image apparently didn't upload? Here it is again.

[Ron Evans]

We unfortunately do not know how the autofocus systems were set up either so interesting test but not conclusive. Still if one needs 50/60P UHD there is only the one choice. The Canon looks a little over exposed in a lot of the shot. At the 800% gamma may need a little grading to look really good. I think there is also a test of the GH5 vs the XF400 of a train too. GH5 clearly sharper but again were they in autofocus and at what settings as both have a lot of controls for auto focus.

[Pete Cofrancesco]

I can see the sharpness difference in the close up. In the second capture the gx blows out the signs more but as the video progresses this goes away. This has more to do with auto exposure. You want to give the edge to Sony that’s fine but nothing you’d be able to spot without a side by side.

I looked up the pricing I was shocked how expensive the GX10 is for a consumer camcorder with that quality of video.