@neokoo Well spotted. Bloom has obviously put it thru a transcode. He's obviously recorded at UHD mp4 and transcoded it to pro res then exported to mp4 again. So its been through a few re-encodes probably third generation. Maybe he will answer here?

@jrd Of the currently available options, yes the GH4 is superior and by quite a wide margin. And there is significantly less hype surrounding the camera when compared to the A7s.

"calling somebody's baby ugly"-nothing wrong with it. i have brand new baby (4w) and I call it ugly. Its a good thing to be objective most new baby's are ugly for non owners. But this is mine so I can be honest :)

Its the Same with camera. I did not like GH2 so I sold it but I can't say it was bad camera just Preferred Gh3 for my needs. GH4 is another step up for my needs. I would prefer 4K would not be there so could be cheaper other wise with this policy Gh7 will cost €3600. But hey other then that I can't complain because it not my baby yet!

I'm not against a dissenting voice either, for that matter, but I'm really not interested in test charts. I did a light color correction on Nick Driftwood's footage myself and it handled just fine. The clip is not exactly a challenging mess or anything: any competent person should be able to get a decent grade from it. As far as comments about ALL this or ALL that, I have to differ: I don't believe ALL the clips we've seen have been overexposed; not ALL the clips we've seen have been oversharpened. It's possible Nick Driftwood's was a hair overexposed, but no more so than anything I shoot every day with the GH3. And I still fail to understand what is meant by "setting your teeth on edge". I haven't seen a single clip, even some of the rose and green tinted ones, that has made me cringe in disgust. One person says it's not a 'prosumer' camera - well, right, every soccer mom knows how to use color bars, time code, master pedestal, etc. Another says skin tones look like Mattel action figures (my own contribution!). Yet another claims there are dozens of equally good cameras at this price point. I think Panasonic could have charged $2,700 and people would still buy the camera.

@jrd show us your work! you must be so grate in making footage that all that shit GH4 stuff is blow away by what you are used to use, since you spot so grately the flaws on it.

Dont be ashame for real, show us your work and why is this camera so shitty dont be a chiken.

Man, it's getting extremely childish in this thread. I personally like to hear all points of view on a camera that I'm considering. I'll then weigh the opinions and make up my own mind. The only thing I don't want to hear is someone saying their opinion matters more than anyone else. Personally, I'm still not 100% sold on the GH4 output/look, but I want to see more before making a decision. A few more weeks and then the camera will be in the hands of many then we'll really know what it's capable of.

One of the best reasons to like this forum is that it allows for dissenting voices. Some sites kick/ban trolls on first contact. That's a stupid thing to do. I'm all for JRD continuing to give his reasons. Rock On!

Still haven't ordered a GH4 myself, but I'm close to pulling the trigger. I spent the day grading footage yesterday with that 444 script and I like what I see.

@x_worpig_x

Like what you did with resolve, I like darker grades personally but it does look very good.

Dissenting is ok, lets just not turn this thread into an all out war, I like what the camera has shown so far in the right hands, even an Alexa can look like shit in the wrong hands like those samples on page 69.

As with anything once we get the camera we will be able to measure the true DR and shortcomings. There has to be quite a few things that limit the camera but as it is out of the box it is probably the best camera for the price that has ever been available. I can't think of anything that comes close for $1700.

Lets get back on topic, this footage has noise in the shadows that I like much better than on the GH2. WB is all over the place with a bluish tint but the overall look is very promising.

Some sites kick/ban trolls on first contact. That's a stupid thing to do. I'm all for JRD continuing to give his reasons.

This is too funny, Johnny -- you have such a generous and expansive mind, you're happy to tolerate "trolls", which apparently means anyone who disagrees with you.

That piece of comedy aside, the real problem here may be that many have come to like digital artifacts. The best known would be false detail -- all the earlier complaints that nothing under the sun, including the BMCC, was as sharp as the GH2, despite the fact other cameras resolve far more lines. Another example would be the illustration-like (rather than photographic) quality of a lot of in-camera processed digital consumer footage. Many people like it.

There's no arguing with taste, though as already noted in one of my other boring troll posts, I'm still interested to see what the 4:2:2 output looks like, as well as any downsampling magic which may come along. Then again, others who aren't thrilled with GH4 4K footage have had the good sense not to comment, and Johnny, among others, has persuaded me of the wisdom of their course.

Congratulations, you are now a unanimous community of like minds.

Low Light City Test Panasonic GH4 vs Blackmagic Design Production Camera

@natureflix - nice find. I wonder what speed of card will work for 10bit 422 1080p?

Interested UK purchasers go to: http://www.amazon.co.uk/DeLock-CFast-Adaptor-Memory-Cards/dp/B006TC8AI2

@jrd, I said the GH4 "is pretty close to the very Holy Grail many have been asking for the last 5 years." in that many have clamored for a very detailed HD image, good DR, good low light, 10bit 4:2:2 HDMI output, high frame rates, high bit rates, flat picture profiles, more range of adjustment and gradability all at an affordable price. Not THE BEST POSSIBLE at any price point.

There's always going to be something you could do better and likely NEVER going to be a perfect camera for everyone and every situation. That doesn't mean we can't appreciate how far we've come and the quality we have now at a price many more can afford. Back in the day we couldn't imagine this quality level for this price. The GH4 is a very capable camera for many different situations and that's something special in itself.

Nothing i've seen so far should have anyone posting such negative nonsense about the camera. Not from pre release firmware and users unfamiliar with the camera. We won't know everything until real users get them and start using them in the field. There will always be caveats and work arounds for lower budget gear. That's the whole point of making it affordable. It's not supposed to be the best camera in existence. It's all RELATIVE to the price point of the camera. So Holy Grail is RELATIVE to the price point and niche the GH4 is designed to be marketed to.

Maybe Im thinking about this incorrectly, but shouldnt the GH4 have higher bitrates to keep the 4k footage at the same quality as the FHD from the GH3? The GH3's 1080 @ 72Mbps > GH4's 3840 @ 200Mbps since 1080 is only one quarter the size of 4k. Shouldnt the 4k bitrate be at least 350-ish Mbps ALL-I and 200 Mbps IPB?