More that 'almost hitting the mark' from Blackmagic... If it's a software glitch, you'd think they could take time away from screwing up Resolve and stick some people on fixing the glitch.
LOL Yea I agree. Now I also use my cameras so much, I honestly haven't even gone to their website to try the newer updates. The camera is 4 years old, it works totally fine outside of the battery glitch and as I said before, the work around is to carry a bunch of 9 dollar batteries around with you and keep swapping them out. To me, that's a far better "toll" then having to carry around an external box in order to record decent quality from the camera.
Blackmagic has also been developing an all-new 4k pocket camera. It uses an entirely different battery system and from my friend who has used it, he says it's only a tiny bit bigger. Since the URSA Pro 4.6k has only ONE major glitch that's just been fixed by a 3rd party for a few hundred bux (OLPF and IR filter) it shows they can make something worth buying. So I prey the new pocket is just like that, a camera that has all the bells and whistles, but none of the bugs.
Personally, the only thing that matters is the chain from imager to finished product. If that is the best it CAN be for the price, then I'm sold. The problem is that most camera manufacturers don't own the chain from imager to post like BM does, so they don't give two shits about how you "edit" your product. To me, that's unacceptable and it's disgusting when ASIC's are so small and inexpensive, there is ZERO excuse. If the GH5 recorded real LOG in Pro Res HQ or XQ in 4k, Cinema DNG RAW, then the workflow from imager to post, would be perfect and I could ignore some of the other inherent issues. However, with all of the other issues the camera has, and the requirement of having external recording to get an editable file format, it's a complete utter failure in my book. The chain from imager to finished file, is full of conversions, which not only degrades the quality, but it also cost more money and takes more time to deal with.
Say what you will about the likes of Panasonic and such, but you'll rarely find them releasing a product that has any kind of major software issues or image quality issues not inherent to the format.
The "glitches" are 10x bigger though, the fact the camera only records a highly compressed Long GOP MPEG format is the biggest glitch of them all!
If you look at all of the still camera turned video camera, they ALL have huge glitches from substantial imager cropping to the inability to record in an acceptable video format for post production.
It's like these manufacturers think all consumers do is playback their videos in a slide show and then throw them away.
The built-in LUTs in Premiere are crap. I have altogether stopped using Resolve, so I won't judge them (might try to download the stable release of 14 today, but not holding out much hope - the 14 I have been using has been a Hodge-podge of thrown together ideas that couldn't even render a TIFF sequence for me). The only LUTs I trust are from Film Convert in terms of 'out of the box' LUTs, and I still don't use those much. I purchased a set of really good GH-line LUTs that have served me very well.
I still use 12.5 and won't be upgrading to 14 for quite a while. I edit in Avid or Premiere and would never edit in a program specifically designed for coloring. Blackmagic can say anything they want about DaVinci but it will never be a professional editor.
But ya really can't get vLog without .h264 or .h265 encoding. The "flat" output the camera has on the HDMI port, isn't the same. It has more noise introduced due to the conversion process to HDMI.
The point is that vLOG s used throughout the Panasonic range of cameras, all the way up to the Varicam 35, which is pretty much universally regarded as a very capable camera. If you are having trouble grading material from the GH5, either because of 3rd party LUTs, as you first said, or because of the limitations of the h.265 codec, as you're stating now, it doesn't mean that vLOG is flawed, or that Panasonic are guilty of 'shitty design'.
Your comments here are very reminiscent of your recent anti-Sony rant, where it was clearly demonstrated that the majority of your issues were down to your own unfamiliarity with the cameras and their settings. You might complain that you don't have the time to learn the correct workflow, but unfortunately that is part of the job. Not all LUTs are created equal, nor does all grading software do a fantastic job with all cameras without help.
If you are having trouble grading material from the GH5
Umm, I don't have "trouble" coloring the GH5, I just think the workflow blows and the results -thanks to the limitation of the codec- aren't what they "could" be. It's not a "familiarity" issue, I work on projects all the time with strange shit, odd-ball cameras and lenses, that all need to match somehow, most of them with MPEG codecs, so "adapting" is what I'm all about.
I'm a professional filmmaker, so I shoot and edit quite a bit of content each year. Literally this second, I'm working on 5 projects in various states of production and post, shot on various cameras, including film. Just last week I colored two music video's, one shot on a 5D MKIII and one shot on a Dragon. Neither one I had any issue coloring, they came out great.
So for me, when I shoot with a camera... ANY CAMERA and the workflow is worse then that of my $998 pocket camera and "free" DaVinci resolve software, I start to raise a red flag. There just is no reason for the complicated menu's, there is no reason for the compresion style they use either. It's not about cost, it's about not giving a shit about workflow.
Sony at least has their own little world and if you live in it, things function properly. Panasonic doesn't have that, they make cameras and that's about it.
I don't think it's fair to pick on Panasonic. They, as a company, have been mostly responsible for the rise in affordable digital cameras for indie filmmakers. From the original DVX 100, to the HVX 200, then they really broke into the DSLR/Mirrorless market with the GH2 (which was really the first Mirrorless that was truly designed to have cinema-type functions without hacking). In the mirrorless market, they have been at the forefront of making cinema-style mirrorless cameras, where other manufacturers like Canon have only recently began to even implement SOME of those features. Sony mirrorless cameras have done a pretty good job staying up with Panasonic, though they still lack a lot of features Panasonic has long since made available, like 10-bit HDMI. The fact that both of these manufacturers have put a lot of cinema-focused features into their mirrirless line of cameras seem to me to directly relate to them both having professional cinema camera markets. Cannon still amazes me, despite having their C-line of somewhat cinema-grade cameras, and despite also being a pioneer in the video industry with the XL1/XL2 and such, they still show an utter lack of desire to add cinema features to their DSLR line.
I'm not sure what your comment about 'Sony's world' is suppose to mean. They make cameras, just like Panasonic, and that is about it. In fact, I'd argue Sony and Panasonic are actually very similar, from what they do to the cameras they offer in their line ups. In the mirrorless market, they have a-series for Sony and Panasonic has the GH-series, In the midrange market they have the lower-end VariCams for Panasonic and the lower-end F-series for Sony, and then both companies have their high-end cinema market which consists of lines like the VariCam 35 from Panasonic and the F55 from Sony.
The reality is though, both manufactures 'cinema' market has been rather stale. In the professional production world, the space is dominated by Arri and Red. I have not seen too many Sony F55 or VariCams as A cams on films with a budget. I'd argue neither really have a 'world', and if anything, Panasonic has developed more of a following than Sony has in the lower-end market.
Edited by Landon D. Parks, 09 September 2017 - 08:33 AM.
Well, I pick on Sony in the same way. It is true that Panasonic was first to market with a 24p DV camcorder, it was made by their "commercial" division, (hence the AG in the name) not the consumer division. They are two different companies and Panasonic's commercial equipment isn't half bad. Their consumer equipment in my opinion, isn't as well thought out.
I'm not sure what your comment about 'Sony's world' is suppose to mean.
If you use E mount lenses, Sony cards, sony card readers, sony software to decode their special codec and sony editing software to edit their special stuff. Sony expects you to live in their world and they offer all the tools needed, but what if you don't wanna use those tools?
They make cameras, just like Panasonic, and that is about it.
Panasonic doesn't make post production tools for their cameras.
In fact, I'd argue Sony and Panasonic are actually very similar.
They sure are! The Japanese want to one-up one another, that's their whole business model. So yes, they're very similar. The difference is that Sony is all about gimmicks and Panasonic generally isn't. Sony will release a camera with one or two unusual features that don't exist on any other camera and Panasonic generally carries features over. Both companies have deliberatly limited their products capabilities in order to meet a certain price point they feel is necessary to meet. Also remember, the commercial products are made by an entirely different entity within Sony and Panasonic.
Reality is though, both manufactures 'cinema' market has been rather stale. In the professional production world, the space is dominated by Arri and Red. I have not seen too many Sony F55 or VariCams as A cams on films with a budget. I'd argue neither really have a 'world', and if anything, Panasonic has developed more of a following than Sony has in the lower-end market.
Yes, that is very true. The F55 is very popular with television, especially in Europe. Sony's proprietary double system workflow, actually works well for television. Taking proxy XAVC-I files right from the camera, which are native in Avid and being able to save the RAW files for re-linking in the color bay. The F65 is also a very popular camera, dozens of features have been shot with it. Panasonic hasn't been able to break into that market, even though the Varicam looks pretty good, it's not been adpoted in the same way.
So I'd argue, the four top cameras are the F55, F65, Alexa XT and Red Dragon for dramatic/scripted production.