Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Panasonic GH3 - my short test "Civilian"

61 posts in this topic

Posted · Report post

What's the highest usable ISO? I'm assuming it's 1600? That's pretty low for end of the 2012. Crop factor sucks too. Basically it's a no go for low light, tight places. For everything else - it's nice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I don't agree. Highest usable ISO is 3200. What other DSLRs do better for 2012? Only two spring to mind - 5D Mark III and 1D X. Both a LOT more expensive than the GH3. And in low light you need to stop the lens right down on those if you want manageable focus.

Needing more than ISO 1600 or 3200 at F0.95 in low light is rare.

As for tight spaces, I assume you're talking about shooting actors with the camera rammed up their noses. For that you will indeed be better off with a 50mm on a 5D Mark III rather than 50mm on the GH2. Oh I forgot - maybe use a 25mm!??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I don't know what's the maximum usable iso for GH3, that's why I asked. 3200. As for tight spaces I mean ppl dancing in clubs kind of stuff. Don't think GH3 will be suitable for that with 2x crop factor. For everything else sure (video wise only though). I wish GH3 was FF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

[quote name='tomekk' timestamp='1353988559' post='22387']
I wish GH3 was FF.
[/quote]

Dont we all. But im good with improved low light and better ergonomic and weather sealing, I like shooting outside alot in not perfect weather, it adds more tone to some shots that need it. Good to know a bit of rain or sand wont mess up the camera.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Yeah, I think the GH3 is probably better in some ways then the GH2 but just don't shoot with them side by side like you did the other day in the BMCC shoot out. In almost every shot where there was a GH2 and GH3, I liked the look of the GH2 better. But then again, if you compare the GH2 to the BMCC, it's not going to look perfect either. :-) I think the GH3 is a odd duck. In some ways better, in some ways just the same if not a little worse. It's seems like it's a matter of choosing what are the most important aspects to you. I'm sure there are a lot of people who will be perfectly happy with the image quality just like there are tons of people who are happy with the 5D MkIII. The low-light performance does seem a lot better to me which is a good thing. I didn't see any moire in any of these shots which is good too. One thing I've noticed (and this is true for 5D too) is that if you shoot with a shallow depth of field, you have much less chance of seeing moire. I mean, this is probably obvious to you guys but I was just musing to myself that all of the footage that I've seen that I thought looked really good, was all shot shallow. Obviously, the technical reason is probably due to that fact that moire only occurs when thin lines are come together. You're more likely to see this in the distance like on buildings or fine patterns in fences. When you are shooting with shallow depth of field, you are usually (although not always) closer to your subject so if you think about it, there's probably less chance of seeing moire. Does that make sense?

I'm glad to see some more pleasing footage coming from this little beast. I was definitely one of those people who made a big deal out of the moire issues of the GH3 footage I'd seen so far. To me, image quality is paramount and I don't feel like that's to much to ask for. It's good to see that moire is at least avoidable and not something that you will be fighting against all the time.
zephyrnoid likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

There's a newer 1.0 firmware that came out recently correct? I don't know the details, but regarding low light, the guys that shot those videos are happier...so it seems that it addressed some issues in the image department.. I was a little concerned about it. it looked like a much better stills camera with a GH2 thrown in for video, & some moire.. lol. I'd like to know how "log" style you can get with it. (I know Cinestyle is supposedly the devil on 8bit footage, but i still dial back a better image with it than without it.) My personal taste though.. I like to shoot flat as a runway model.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Thanks for the video Andrew. Question: I'm not familiar at all with the Helios 58mm F2 44M-2 lens you mentioned. Does it natively fit onto the GH3, or are you using an adaptor? Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

[quote name='galenb' timestamp='1353991858' post='22392']
Yeah, I think the GH3 is probably better in some ways then the GH2 but just don't shoot with them side by side like you did the other day in the BMCC shoot out. In almost every shot where there was a GH2 and GH3, I liked the look of the GH2 better. But then again, if you compare the GH2 to the BMCC, it's not going to look perfect either. :-) I think the GH3 is a odd duck. In some ways better, in some ways just the same if not a little worse. It's seems like it's a matter of choosing what are the most important aspects to you. I'm sure there are a lot of people who will be perfectly happy with the image quality just like there are tons of people who are happy with the 5D MkIII. The low-light performance does seem a lot better to me which is a good thing. I didn't see any moire in any of these shots which is good too. One thing I've noticed (and this is true for 5D too) is that if you shoot with a shallow depth of field, you have much less chance of seeing moire. I mean, this is probably obvious to you guys but I was just musing to myself that all of the footage that I've seen that I thought looked really good, was all shot shallow. Obviously, the technical reason is probably due to that fact that moire only occurs when thin lines are come together. You're more likely to see this in the distance like on buildings or fine patterns in fences. When you are shooting with shallow depth of field, you are usually (although not always) closer to your subject so if you think about it, there's probably less chance of seeing moire. Does that make sense?

I'm glad to see some more pleasing footage coming from this little beast. I was definitely one of those people who made a big deal out of the moire issues of the GH3 footage I'd seen so far. To me, image quality is paramount and I don't feel like that's to much to ask for. It's good to see that moire is at least avoidable and not something that you will be fighting against all the time.
[/quote]

Yeah, I agree. For simple medium to close up shots moire is less of an issue because you'll most likely be shooting at a wider aperture, the 5D is fine for this. But things get messy when you need landscape, having to lose that shallow depth of field can show the bigger issues of the 5D. Thats where the GH2 seems to shine, incredible amount of detail.

http://vimeo.com/29549553
zephyrnoid likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

What exactly is the fascination of a FF GH3? Seems unnecessary.. If Panasonic decide to increase the size of the sensor it should be to S35 not 35mm FF............... Why drastically increase the price for near to no benefit whatsoever? Just look at what the BMCC does with an even smaller sensor............................ Tell me again why Panasonic should make a 35mm FF camera?
zephyrnoid likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

so I can have perfect stealth hybrid, not a video camera only. FF for stills. No crop factor is nice too. If I wanted video only Id buy video camera.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

[quote name='/p/' timestamp='1354024283' post='22436']
Tell me again why Panasonic should make a 35mm FF camera?
[/quote]

Marketing :)

If panasonic ever did make a FF camera I have to wonder what kind of mount it would have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Thanks a ton, Andrew !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

So, obviously you wouldn't mind not aligning with DaVinci's official recommendations?
(ASUS P9X79 PRO Motherboard + GeForce GTX 580 + 12 GB RAM or higher)
By the way, from their documentation it's quite unclear if a second graphic card (Quadro 4000 etc.) is actually required or just a plus...

[quote name='EOSHD' timestamp='1353964223' post='22358']
Sub $700 is:

Intel 3.4Ghz i7 2700K
8GB RAM
GeForce GTX 560 Ti 1.5GB
USB 3.0

Those are the bits that matter. The rest doesn't need to be anything special.

This should all come to under $700 and if you can't build it yourself, buy one second hand on eBay. Mine is a Dell XPS 8300 of similar spec to the above and it cost me 600 euros.

If you can stretch another $200 for an SSD, that is a good idea. Put a 2TB hard disk in there (that is OK for editing raw footage off), but also an 240GB SSD for the main OS, apps & boot drive.
[/quote]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Andrew Nice film!

[quote name='galenb' timestamp='1353991858' post='22392']
Yeah, I think the GH3 is probably better in some ways then the GH2 but just don't shoot with them side by side like you did the other day in the BMCC shoot out. In almost every shot where there was a GH2 and GH3, I liked the look of the GH2 better. But then again, if you compare the GH2 to the BMCC, it's not going to look perfect either. :-) I think the GH3 is a odd duck. In some ways better, in some ways just the same if not a little worse. It's seems like it's a matter of choosing what are the most important aspects to you. I'm sure there are a lot of people who will be perfectly happy with the image quality just like there are tons of people who are happy with the 5D MkIII. The low-light performance does seem a lot better to me which is a good thing. I didn't see any moire in any of these shots which is good too. One thing I've noticed (and this is true for 5D too) is that if you shoot with a shallow depth of field, you have much less chance of seeing moire. I mean, this is probably obvious to you guys but I was just musing to myself that all of the footage that I've seen that I thought looked really good, was all shot shallow. Obviously, the technical reason is probably due to that fact that moire only occurs when thin lines are come together. You're more likely to see this in the distance like on buildings or fine patterns in fences. When you are shooting with shallow depth of field, you are usually (although not always) closer to your subject so if you think about it, there's probably less chance of seeing moire. Does that make sense?

[/quote]

Good post galenb I was having second thoughts about the GH3 and was starting to side with Andrews take on the BMC and canon mark3. However I really liked this film

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I couldn't past the first 8 seconds of the video. That is horrible image quality! Needs to be hacked...



;)
Zach likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

[quote name='blazer003' timestamp='1354078800' post='22500']
I couldn't past the first 8 seconds of the video. That is horrible image quality! Needs to be hacked...



;)
[/quote]

Bravo - Brilliant first post

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

[quote name='EOSHD' timestamp='1353986334' post='22385']
I don't agree. Highest usable ISO is 3200. What other DSLRs do better for 2012? Only two spring to mind - 5D Mark III and 1D X. Both a LOT more expensive than the GH3. And in low light you need to stop the lens right down on those if you want manageable focus.

Needing more than ISO 1600 or 3200 at F0.95 in low light is rare.

As for tight spaces, I assume you're talking about shooting actors with the camera rammed up their noses. For that you will indeed be better off with a 50mm on a 5D Mark III rather than 50mm on the GH2. Oh I forgot - maybe use a 25mm!??
[/quote]


I saw this video on Vimeo the day before, and I was quite impressed, with the detail, in the GH3, at ISO 1600 and 3200. Also, the GH2 had far too much noise, at ISO 3200. Also, that famous green tinge, was not there, anymore.

Incidentally, this guy has shot this test video, at f2.0, on the 20mm f1.7 panny lens.


These are the urls:
(The Vimeo Video)
http://vimeo.com/54325211

(this guy's own blog)
http://www.hybridcams.fr/2012/11/27/panasonic-lumix-gh3-le-test/


ISO Testing:
At 1600
(GH3)
http://www.hybridcams.fr/wp-content/uploads/1600%20ISO_GH3.jpg
(GH2)
http://www.hybridcams.fr/wp-content/uploads/1600%20ISO_GH2.jpg


At 3200
(GH3)
http://www.hybridcams.fr/wp-content/uploads/3200%20ISO_GH3.jpg
(GH2)
http://www.hybridcams.fr/wp-content/uploads/3200%20ISO_GH2.jpg

One thing, though, I noticed, is, that, that, the colours in (AutoWhiteBalance) the GH3 leans towards magenta, and the GH2, towards green. Also, that strange flare, in very high contrast areas, still exists. You can check the windows and street lights, for this, in the video.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

In that ISO test video, you can see a lot more detail and less compression noise with the GH3. The tree branches are more defined. But I'd like to know how a hacked GH2 would compare. I know it'll be close, but I do agree with the colors too. GH2 is too clinical and that make sense with the green hue. I think the GH3 going towards magenta is good, comes close to what Canon does which I like a lot. I wish they would do a test with people. I think Philip Bloom did an ISO test in a bar for the D800 or D4? That was a great test to see how skin tones look at insane ISOs. In any case, good video and I look forward to the GH3 soon!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

^^You can see more details because from the screenshot posted in the link GH3 is brighter maybe due to magenta. To me noise looks the same. To compare cameras ISOs this guy should wb it properly imho. It's not a good ISO test when u set it to auto a let the camera do the magic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

[quote name='/p/' timestamp='1354024283' post='22436']
What exactly is the fascination of a FF GH3? Seems unnecessary.. If Panasonic decide to increase the size of the sensor it should be to S35 not 35mm FF............... Why drastically increase the price for near to no benefit whatsoever? Just look at what the BMCC does with an even smaller sensor............................ Tell me again why Panasonic should make a 35mm FF camera?
[/quote]

Marketing. There's no way they can compete with Canon when all the dummies out there are obsessed with sensor size with their 'bigger is better' mentality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

[quote name='nahua' timestamp='1354092383' post='22507'] In that ISO test video, you can see a lot more detail and less compression noise with the GH3. The tree branches are more defined. But I'd like to know how a hacked GH2 would compare. I know it'll be close, but I do agree with the colors too. GH2 is too clinical and that make sense with the green hue. I think the GH3 going towards magenta is good, comes close to what Canon does which I like a lot. I wish they would do a test with people. I think Philip Bloom did an ISO test in a bar for the D800 or D4? That was a great test to see how skin tones look at insane ISOs. In any case, good video and I look forward to the GH3 soon! [/quote]

I think, maybe the GH3 pushes 4-2-0, as far as it can go. I am guessing, that, this is pretty close to 4-2-2.

[quote name='tomekk' timestamp='1354096764' post='22512'] ^^You can see more details because from the screenshot posted in the link GH3 is brighter maybe due to magenta. To me noise looks the same. To compare cameras ISOs this guy should wb it properly imho. It's not a good ISO test when u set it to auto a let the camera do the magic. [/quote]

Tom, you need a New monitor. I am guessing, that, you cannot notice the level of detail, either because your monitor's resolution isn't too much, or (which is more likely) you need glasses, and, you are not aware of it.

Please look at the window grills, and the curtains, and the details on the trees and leaves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I hope people are downloading the files and not just streaming the Vimeo clips.

Also use a decent screen. I recommend Dell U2711.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

[quote name='blazer003' timestamp='1354078800' post='22500']
I couldn't past the first 8 seconds of the video. That is horrible image quality! Needs to be hacked...



;)
[/quote]

Welcome to the forum.

I'm glad you think filmmaking is all about sharpness and image quality. One more person I don't need to pay very much attention to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

[quote name='sanveer' timestamp='1354113498' post='22524']
I think, maybe the GH3 pushes 4-2-0, as far as it can go. I am guessing, that, this is pretty close to 4-2-2.



Tom, you need a New monitor. I am guessing, that, you cannot notice the level of detail, either because your monitor's resolution isn't too much, or (which is more likely) you need glasses, and, you are not aware of it.

Please look at the window grills, and the curtains, and the details on the trees and leaves.
[/quote]

well maybe, didnt think of it. I'm on the road with laptop. Still I think WB should be the same if u want accurate comparison, no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

[quote name='tomekk' timestamp='1354114092' post='22529']
well maybe, didnt think of it. I'm on the road with laptop. Still I think WB should be the same if u want accurate comparison, no?
[/quote]

I Agree, that the video should have been whitebalanced to get exact perspective. But, I am saying, that, if you put that aside, you will realise a noticeable improvement in video resolution and detail. And, considering, that, it is the GH2, that, it is beating, its a Big Deal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites