Andrew Reid

The problem with the internet is that our personalities are hidden behind opinions, we are like walking opinions. So people judge one another over their opinion, which is wrong because in real life people judge each other by what kind of PERSON they are. I'm really tired of the personal attacks just because one happens to disagree with someone one said. Just to pick up on what Steve said over at Pro Video: "[color=#000000][font=Times, Helvetica, 'Lucida Grande', Arial, Geneva, Verdana, sans-serif][size=4][background=rgb(201, 224, 246)]Many people did not like the GH2 if you listen to the comments—me being one of them—I thought it looked to video’ish and over lit. It didn’t capture the nature of the dark moody scene. The scary part is that so many viewers thought the supermarket lighting was attractive."[/background][/size][/font][/color] The GH2 didn't light the scene - if it wasn't dark and moody that is not the fault of the camera. Almost all my natural light shoots with the GH2 have gone for 'dark and moody' and it handles the shadows just fine. I don't think Colt's lighting was 'supermarket lighting', I felt it best matched the scene because of the size of the window and the brightness of the outdoor area, dark and moody made no sense to me. There you go, so I don't agree with Steve in this instance but I still respect him as a person and what he does with his life. Amazing isn't it, how it's possible to do both. To question, to disagree, is healthy in real life - so I don't see why disagreeing needs to be so destructive when it is a typed statement on the net.

[quote name='HellKat' timestamp='1345303087' post='15987']But, man, learn your place.[/quote] How about you learn your place? Are you forgetting it is my blog, where do you suggest I put my own personal opinion if not on here? Being offended by what you perceive incorrectly as a bias implies you have certain rights which I've trodden on. Sorry for stomping on your rights over my blog sir! You don't have any right and I can write what I want.

[quote name='HellKat' timestamp='1345303087' post='15987'] Although I agree with a number of things you mentioned in your critique of part 3 (in particular, where you talk about endless reminders about the importance of creativity which BTW often look like mantras lacking any sunstance), I think the overall tone of your blog post (and your advices) are not appropriate. Part 3 does not confirm your major leitmotif regarding GH2 - not a surprise, you do not like it. Here is a piece of advice for you - next time you do what Zacuto did with their overall excellent and amazing effort by its scale and contribution to the filmmaking community, and then we'll see if you are up to the challange yourself. To finish on a positive note - I respect what you do and check your blog almost every day. Equally, I respect your contribution to the community (even if I sometimes disagree with all your biases). But, man, learn your place. [/quote] Really idiotic comment that does nothing to address the facts.

It's a very complex thing to fix especially in a cheaper camera, the BMD already has a refrigerated sensor to cope with 2.5k raw, doubling the scan speed of the sensor would considerably increase cost, cooling requirements and power consumption. I'd say it will be around 2 years before the scan gets considerably faster on DSLRs, and 4 years before global shutter comes along to anything under $30,000.

[quote name='evil_thought2' timestamp='1345264860' post='15948'] I am entitled to my opinion. GH2 fanboys had no trouble trumpeting GH2 performance in earlier parts when they thought the over-lit GH2 was doing good. Now when they don't like GH2 performance in more objective test where all cameras are using the same lighting, we are being told the test is now flawed. This is funny. Part 3 clearly has shown GH2 is nowhere even close to any video camera. It performs exactly like a $700 m4/3 camera. [/quote] This gets boring very quickly. 1 - it wasn't just fanboys trumpeting the GH2, it was Francis Ford Coppola. 2. I find the fanboy thing offensive because it implies a lack of technical judgement, clouded by emotion. Go and tell the grading studio Andy Lee knows in the UK who said the GH2 holds up brilliantly in post - and they have been dealing with stuff from Red and Alexa for years.

[quote name='dbp' timestamp='1345202758' post='15881']The lower end cameras need more time and equipment to truly compete, yet in scenarios where that budget and equipment is available, those cameras would be passed over for something further up the chain.[/quote] Where does this view come from? It's weird. If anything the lower end cameras need less time and equipment to compete, as has been proved outside bloated studio setups like this time and time again by people with talent and a tripod, and not a lot else. Musgo's DP couldn't have delivered that look on a micro budget feature, without the GH2 ably assisting them. [media]http://vimeo.com/33025136[/media] I am sure a lot of effort went into it, but a lot of equipment, grading and money? Not really. It isn't just creatively good it is technically good too with fantastic detail, colour and decent dynamic range. I can only truly speak for the amount of effort that goes into my own work and the below video took me 4 hours to shoot and the same again to edit, and it is completely ungraded straight out of the camera. [media]http://vimeo.com/33047750[/media] I stuffed that GH2 into a location with tricky lighting and it did a superb job for me.

[quote name='jgharding' timestamp='1345202214' post='15880']Lighting everything the same -- in effect purposefully mis-using a less-forgiving piece of equipment -- then saying "look, cheap cameras aren't as good" is a bit of pointless academia IMHO. The spec sheet already tells me that information.[/quote] Yes this is bang on correct, they wouldn't mishandle an Alexa in a scientific test so why mishandle the GH2 by getting the exposure and focus wrong in 2 out of the 3 empirical shots?

[quote name='evil_thought2' timestamp='1345183267' post='15865']there is no coverage of part 3 on this site. [/quote] Conspiracy? Really? http://www.eoshd.com/content/8766/revenge-of-the-zacuto-shootout-2012-part-3-review Be more patient next time.

[quote name='HurtinMinorKey' timestamp='1345219499' post='15911'] I'll admit, watching "artists" try to be scientists is entertaining. [/quote] Even more entertaining the other way round! :o

[img]http://www.eoshd.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/zacuto-shootout-revenge-part-3.jpg[/img] The third and final part of Zacuto's debate provoking documentary on cinematography and cameras is out. Part 3 is to me kind of like Revenging the Revenge because it goes back to a non-creative scientific (empirical) test of the cameras. They appear in order of cost from the $500 iPhone to the $70,000 Sony F65 and each are treated with the same lighting, similar settings and the same grading to match as closely as possible.

[quote name='mopixels' timestamp='1345220447' post='15914'] Why not cheap FS100? It seems to have the sensor and all the features of a FS100. What is missing? [/quote] The sensor and all the features.

Update - the first camera is now on its way to Someone1.00. Shipped yesterday! Tracking number provided today. http://www.nex-hack.com/topic/1109-update-success-first-camera-purchase/page__st__20

By making the sensor more efficient. It's a natural year on year progression, same with CPUs.

Exactly. The sharpened 1D X looks too electronic. The unsharpened 1D X looks the same as the 5D3 sharpened. Keep that $3000 in your pocket. Seriously.

The future codec for DSLRs is coming. Was sent this by email today, thanks Tero [url="http://techreport.com/discussions.x/23429"]http://techreport.co...ussions.x/23429[/url] This will be more efficient at the same bitrate and this means better image quality. For example 24mbit would look something like 44mbit on current codecs. [color=#000000][font=trebuchet ms', sans-serif][size=3]Over the past few years, H.264 video compression has permeated just about every corner of the tech world—YouTube, Blu-ray, cable and satellite HDTV, cell phones, tablets, and digital camcorders. Could it be just a year away from obsolescence? According to a [url="http://www.ericsson.com/news/120814_mpeg_244159018_c"]news release by Ericsson[/url], the Moving Picture Experts Group (a.k.a. MPEG) met in Stockholm, Sweden last month to "approve and issue" a draft standard for a next-generation video format. That format, dubbed High Efficiency Video Coding, or HVEC for short, will purportedly enable "compression levels roughly twice as high" as H.264.[/size][/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=trebuchet ms', sans-serif][size=3]Ericsson's Per Fröjd, who chairs the Swedish MPEG delegation, comments, "There's a lot of industry interest in this because it means you can halve the bit rate and still achieve the same visual quality, or double the number of television channels with the same bandwidth, which will have an enormous impact on the industry." HVEC could make its debut in commercial products "as early as in 2013," claims Fröjdh. He expects mobile devices will be the first ones to make use of the new format, with TV likely to lag behind.[/size][/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=trebuchet ms', sans-serif][size=3]That all sounds rather exciting. Halving bitrates while maintaining image quality would be fantastic for streaming web video. It might be advantageous for devices with high-PPI displays, as well, if they can offer better image quality at today's bit rates. However, hardware support could impede early adoption, since the hardware H.264 video decoders in today's mobile processors might not be compatible with the new standard[/size][/font][/color]

Let's be absolutely clear. The reason the GH2 performed as poorly as the iPhone in the empirical test was because the test administrator took a flawed approach. It has nothing to do with the true empirical, scientific, purely observational performance of the camera. I will put the exact reasons why this test is so flawed in a blog post once the latest Sony news has had time to cool down. The only reason I haven't yet is that I've been busy with the NEX-Hack community and I don't like having to point out negative things about Zacuto as they did a great job on Parts 1 & 2 and are generally a great company. We can forgive them the odd mistake I think.

It does solve the audio and rig issue of a DSLR if you are into shoulder mounted shooting. But it actually doesn't excite me that much to be honest. I've never been big on the ENG stuff. I can see Michael Moore giving it a spin though!

[img]http://www.eoshd.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/nex-7.jpg[/img] My friend over at Sony Alpha Rumors has given this the highest SR5 ranking. Apparently NEX is going full frame.

From the blog: [list=1] [*][b]It isn't a future consumer camera.[/b] It is a low end ENG camera for shoulder mounted video work. [*][b]It isn't a cheap FS100.[/b] It is a NEX 5N in an ENG body with XLR inputs. (Similarly the VG20 is a NEX 5N in a high end consumer camcorder body) [/list] Instead this is practical tool for run & gun documentary shooters, live event shooters, news gathers and corporate video. Most other kinds of filmmakers are much better off with the FS100 or a DSLR.

How many times is rolling shutter really a problem? Not that often in my opinion. John said in the interview that it is no worse than the GH2 and 5D any way. True the sensor probably has a global shutter mode but the image quality won't be as good in that mode - likely much noisier with less dynamic range. Look at the current specs of scientific sensors - global shutter mode always worse. This is why Panasonic haven't brought theirs to the market yet.

[url="http://gizmodo.com/5935344/canon-dslr-video-compared-1dx-vs-5d-mark-iii-vs-t4i"]http://gizmodo.com/5...mark-iii-vs-t4i[/url] On this Gizmodo test, towards the end I think the 5D3 sharpened in post actually looks preferable to the 1DX sharpened or not sharpened. So if you haven't got that spare $3500 kicking around, just drag the good old sharpen filter to your timeline :)

It isn't a cheap FS100 unfortunately guys. It is an expensive NEX 5N.

It all looks more blurred vertically than horizontally, I agree for $6500 the 1D X is not on my list to buy for video.

Donation tracker added at NEX-Hack.com http://www.nex-hack.com/donate/

They both had extra post sharpening done to them - didn't they?