I just got my new G6 and so far I am loving it. One problem, thought. I can not open raw pictures in Photoshop CS5. I updated the camera raw plugin, but still it says that the camera raw does not support it. Is anybody having the same issue?

Just got the g6 and loving it. The kit 14 140 is not bad but really enjoying it with the zuiko 12mm.

Got it mainly for timelapse and video and working out well so far Didn't think the wifi stuff would bother me but remote control from ipad whilst doing timelapse is actually damned handy.

Ten

Shot on G6. All shots 50p except the final shot in 24p.

g6 + kit test

Why do you say that debinatx? I thought they had the same sensor...

Call me crazy, but to my eye, the GH2 looks much better than the GH3 (read: cinematic/filmic). The GH3 looks too "clinical", if that makes sense.

What are the chances that the G6 with a hack will have that similar look to the GH2? I would just get a GH2, but focus peaking is worth the wait!

@debinatx

Thnks. After reading it again, I realized that the whole bit I quoted was specific to MP4. I'll be stickin' to AVCHD.

@driftwood Don't the G6 and GH2 use the same sensor, only with different processing? Were you talking about GX7 when you mentioned a better sensor?

@stonebat Im not saying better image quality per se. Im saying the encode is important and it can help resolve artifacting. Of course its a better sensor - it ought to be. Im saying if these were hacked = even better. The h264 encode is what Im referring to NOT the performance of the sensor and the pixel binning. That stuff above is all pre encode to h264.

You can't simply say smaller sub block matrix size = better image quality.

@stonebat Yes, the AVCHD modes would be comparable if hacked (like the GH3's AVCHD modes) to the GH2 AVCHD modes. But their bitrate settings are too low for Intra. Needs a hack. The GX7 transform doesn't use finer transformation of subblocks over the GH2. Comparable.

FYI Large portions of the picture in the GH3/Canon 5D MKIII quicktime .mov modes (High Profile lvl 5) are coded with 8x8 (a big saving on the transform arithmetic) and only vertical/horizontal edges or stark differences in highlights and shadows are coded with 4x4 transform resulting in a more pleasing image but actually results in quite a soft encode.

When the picture is broken up into the smaller 4x4 subblocks the image (with extra bitrate thrown into the cook) is finer transformed and often results in a more sharper picture from the resulting high to low frequencies as in the hacked GH2.

The DR in the G6 is slightly better - probably 2/3s of a stop However, the rejigged encoder in the GH2 hacked - re: latest Cluster X settings - easily resolves a much better IQ and motion artifact-free image from the h264 encode.

Tested across Elecard Studio v2 tool suite, all the new GH2 Cluster X series settings trump ANY other settings or h264 encodes on any camera Ive seen (Canon 5D MKIII, Nikon D800, other panys) using h264, period, in my latest findings. And Ive done a lot of analysing of late. So you weigh it up - the sensor might be resolving an immediately better picture, but is their implemented encoder good enough to equate and retain that quality?

The GH2 DOESN'T use 8x8 transform (adaptive transform, and part of high profile level 5) like the majority of the newer HDSLRs / HDSLMs which mix 8x8 with 4x4 (and 16x16) the GH2 uses 4x4 - NO adaptive transform. But the finer transformation of the GH2's overall 4x4 DC coefficients throughout the whole picture provides better IQ rendition at the cost of a higher computational hit (and bitrate increase) of the image from the sensor.

AVCHD spans

Been using the G6 for over a week now as basically a beginner to taking digital video and am really enjoying it. Has anyone made use of the new (i assume) white balance adjustment matrix? I've been setting it at A:3 M:3 and I like the slight colour change it gives.

Also, anyone nailed down some good flat settings for maximum dynamic range? I've been using natural with everything except NR dialed down and it looks to retain the most highlight detail.

Also I've been pretty much exclusively shooting MP4 files over the AVCHD for ease of editing. Haven't noticed a difference in quality - but then again I haven't been pixel peeping.