Sara

"Look, you can get great images out of cheap cameras. I agree 100%, I use cheap cameras. However, I find this "GH2 = All I need" and "Canon needs their cinema DSLR to be under $3,000" attitude ridiculous." Totally agree shawn.  :) The one recent development that is great about video is the saturation of the market - rental prices have dropped considerably throughout the US (Europe too?).  Getting the right "tool" for the job is very easy now. I know some people are not big on renting, but I find it quite valuable.

[quote] I don't like the GH2 when it comes to low light. Cheap cameras will sell more but that doesn't make it better. GH2 is awesome when hacked but I'll take a F3 over it. I understand people love the GH2 on this site, but if Canon adds the things we really want in a DSLR camera, I don't expect it to be that cheap. The GH2 is the best deal by far, but It's not the end all be all. If you're expecting a film/cinema camera to be under $3,000 you'll be using the GH2 for the rest of your life, which isn't a problem at all. [/quote] I love the F3 also but getting 4:2:2 or 4:4:4 out of it isn't cheap.  $14,000 for the camera (s-log now free) plus external recorders makes it a $15,000 camera. Anyway have you seen what the GH2 can do in low light with Orion? [url=http://youtu.be/OKTmb8opPEI]http://youtu.be/OKTmb8opPEI[/url] And was with a soft lens (SLRmagic 12mm) no AF and ISO 3200!

[quote author=toxotis70 link=topic=360.msg2236#msg2236 date=1330973630] this is clearly from denoised program , way too soft . 5D MKII is noisier  but musch sharper. [/quote] You think it is fake? Might be. Because if it is real the MK3 looks poor at high iso - no detail.  Everything mushy.

Thanks for the links. [url=http://blog.vincentlaforet.com/2012/03/01/canon-5d-mkiii-my-thoughts/]http://blog.vincentlaforet.com/2012/03/01/canon-5d-mkiii-my-thoughts/[/url] Vincent who shot to original MK2 videos doesn't seem impressed by the MK3. Bummer.

[quote author=plochmann link=topic=345.msg2156#msg2156 date=1330739686] Driftwood's been upping the ante with crazy gop settings and Intra Matricies!  What do these patches use for gop and are they intraframe...I'm not sure what the matrix thing is anyway.  I do know that I"m impressed by the Quantum X2 rocket V3, even more so than the last GOP3 stuff that wasn't much better than Intraesting.  So I just was curious how the new unified compares to Rocket v3.  Anyone please answer, have to stop this itch on my brain.  :P [/quote] Nick sums up his patches in the first post of this thread: [url=http://tiny.cc/33nuu]http://tiny.cc/33nuu[/url] Best motion and easiest editing is a GOP1 hack, but they can be brutal on memory cards. Orion is the tops now for quality because of its CBR but the file sizes are large.  Just load and test - there really is no "perfect" patch - they all have their uses.  Quantum, Flowmotion, Cake, and EOSHDs patches being the most popular.

Oh no.  Book link spam guy is in this thread too!

if you are in the US , lensrentals.com is cheap and reputable for lenses, filters, matteboxes, and tons of other gear. Lots of fun!

[quote author=IsleOfRed link=topic=350.msg2145#msg2145 date=1330713809] Great article, however when you mention that DSLR are Oscar acceptable; I believe Cinema and Broadcast acceptable would have been a more reasonable point as the Oscar (or any other major awards) have a large degree of being incredibly biased.  Thou the only issue to me saying that DSLRs are cinema/broadcast acceptable is that; majority of movies which publicly declared it was shot on SLR have been terrible as reviews alone would state. I.e see Red Tails, Act of Valour, Newlyweds. However those which never publicly mentioned SLRs were used are generally good to great. see Black Swan, 127 hours, Drive, I don't want to talk about Kevin etc [/quote] While I agree with you that nearly every 5DMK2 movie I have seen are not to our liking - Andrew was implying that they are more than enough of a "tool" to get a decent movie made.  All up to the artist behind the lens.  Heck if I see another kid rent a Red Epic and shoot 120fps slow motion of his dog or a stream of pee ill shoot myself.  But it doesn't mean the camera blows - I am confident that Promethius will look amazing because of Ridley Scott's vision and the team of hundreds of people he works with. Also almost all the movies you mentioned use the 5DMK2 for SMALL portions of the movie - not the entire production. 

[quote author=toggen link=topic=352.msg2150#msg2150 date=1330723239] Got it. thanks to all! Too bad,really - having to plunder around with filters.. [/quote] ...like every other professional shooting movies for hollywood? It is part of film making. Filters cut "some" sharpness but they are a needed accessory when controlling exposure or for creative flare or softening effects.  Heliopan make a good Variable ND filter for your lenses - costs around $250. If you have a good matte box you can use 4x4 or larger filters and stack them quite easily. Have fun!

On personalview they claim the color is only 4:2:0 and the same crap as MK2. True?

Three things control exposure.  Aperture, Shutter Speed, and ISO.  Basic basic photography / videography. So if you don't want to change Aperture you are left with 2 options.  And when shooting video you usually want to use the 180 degree rule, leaving your shutter speed 1/50th of a second (for 24p shooting) for optimal motion. So you are now left with one option....iso! The + - 3 EV options are greyed out for a reason.

[quote author=RobertoSF link=topic=349.msg2121#msg2121 date=1330673581] Does it have a mirror? Can we mount PL cinema glass to it...? Like LOMOs? Thanks for posting the latest, Andrew... glad you are out there monitoring the front lines of development... [/quote] There are Canon to PL adapters out there but remember that very few PL lenses cover the image circle of a FF sensor (though a Canon 7D 1.6x crop is usually fine).  And good ones don't come cheap: [url=http://www.hotrodcameras.com/category/custom-pl-modified-cameras]http://www.hotrodcameras.com/category/custom-pl-modified-cameras[/url] While there are many advantages to a large FF 35mm sized sensor - this is one of the biggest disadvantages.  Getting sharp corners on FF isn't easy and even FF lenses often need to be stopped down to F4 - F5.6 to avoid vignetting.  Not that it matters much because focus pulling at F1.8 or F2.0 with FF is very difficult for even the most advanced pro's working in the industry. Cheers!

IMO the Mario_Nette is the one to watch (Radball looks shit).  Whoever shot the Mario_Nette vid knows what they are doing.  Challenging situations - more so than Nikons Joyride video. The opening grass shot shows great movement, tons of detail for a web compressed video, and excellent color (though the grass bokeh is nervous because of whatever lens they chose).  The rocky roads show no aliasing and the skin seem great imo.  Again the color depth - Digic 5? - looks fantastic.  And the closing scenes at night have superior color vs what Nikon has been showing.  But alas it is just a low res web sample so who really knows.  But I like it. It will be a tough battle between the D800 HDMI out at 4:2:2 using a Ninja or Shuttledeck vs the MK3....but my money would be on the MK3. Though if Panasonic is smart - they could offer I-frames, 60p, clean HDMI out and an expansive color space and trump everyone with a GH3.  They could even charge $1500 and people would eat it up. Awesome time to be a videographer!

If you have a good memory card it is. Make sure you own a few 95mbs Sandisk cards - don't cheap out and buy anything else.  Have fun!

[quote author=hoodlum link=topic=315.msg1969#msg1969 date=1330050046] Is there a glossary of terms somewhere for these hack patches.  Not used to all these terms Intra, GOP and other short forms.  Just picked up a GH2 with MKE400 and trying to figure out where to start with video. [/quote] [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_of_pictures]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_of_pictures[/url] Quantum is currently the highest quality but also try Flomotion.  Both can be found here: [url=http://www.personal-view.com/talks/categories/hacks]http://www.personal-view.com/talks/categories/hacks[/url]

wow! that would take a lot of work.  Weeks perhaps.  lol.

Exceptional for those ISO ratings. No doubt the C300 excels for "on site, no light, documentary" type shoots.  (about all it is good for sadly - way over priced as well)  Canon did a great job with the sensor and processing to keep noise levels down and detail high in poor lighting conditions. Thanks for sharing!

[quote author=arknox link=topic=309.msg1941#msg1941 date=1329947138] As much as I love the GH2 and am amazed by what it can do, I want a camera that can be taken seriously by clients, is in a professional form factor and can deliver both great stills and video. Surely shouldn't be much to ask being as we're now in 2012... [/quote] Never understood this if video is important (stills are a different matter but a second shooter should handle stills - pro's rarely do both - Greg Williams being an exception) A GH2 destroys the $4,000 Panasonic AF100 (and in many areas all Canon DSLRs currently available - we are talking video).  So if you can't communicate this to your client....something is wrong with your communication skills.  Heck BBC and NatGeo use GH2's constantly.  Plus you need to rig a decent matte box, follow focus gear, large tripod, audio recording devices etc anyway.  All that gear "looks pro" and the cameras hide under all that stuff anyway (pic of Canon below). Not picking on you - just wondering why people always say this. If you REALLY care about looking "pro" you shouldn't consider DSLRs at all - the market (USA at least) is flooded with cameras and rental prices have plummeted in recent months.  Alexa, Red Epic Scarlets, Sony F35's can be rented for very little cash.                                                                            Course "if" Canon DSLRs get clean HDMI out via a magic lantern hack in the next few weeks (possible) - the landscape changes yet again.                                                                                                                                                                                                                           

[url=http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/953/gh2-patch-vault-most-popular-patches-in-one-place]http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/953/gh2-patch-vault-most-popular-patches-in-one-place[/url] Lots of good ones there! Including Quantum 9b or the newer Quantum X2 (3 and 4 soon to be released) or [url=http://www.eoshd.com/gh2-patch-vault#c2]http://www.eoshd.com/gh2-patch-vault#c2[/url]

I went through similar tests but was struggling to find a difference...and the change in color from smooth to cinema (punchy colors) almost makes it not worth it unless someone would "want" that color shift.  Frustrating that we have to deal with these gamma/color profiles and don't have acesss to something more neutral.  Sorry I couldn't find more of a difference.  Maybe someone else?

Interesting.  Ill examine your files and run some tests of my own later tonight.  No doubt smooth gives more DR "before" an edit...but what happens to the files after ie noise, false color etc. Sad that GH2 users don't have access to cinemagamma and flat type settings like what the Canon 5D has.  Something I hope the GH3 gets.

Remember that it is unlikely that a GH3 will give users some of the things that make the GH2 so great so waiting might not get you that far ahead. #1.  The GH3 will likely cost more. #2.  Not likely that the GH3 will run GOP1 and give users access to huge bit rates like the hack does.  It is difficult for a manufacture to tell customers "hey use the camera at this setting but you will only get 8 minutes of footage on an 8 gig memory card."  (though it would be brave of Panasonic to do it - if they can still warranty a camera using such settings) #3.  Even if it does get hacked it will take at least a year before a Ptools for it is created and decent hacks exist for it. #4.  Nobody should shoot serious video with only 1 camera anyway - so getting 1 or 2 GH2 units now and supplementing it with a GH3 down the road makes a lot of sense.  I doubt getting the two cameras to produce similar results will be that difficult - people are already using the GH2 to cut between lots of different brands atm. #5.  Perhaps you can buy one GH2 now and just rent one (under $100 a week) for larger projects that would require a backup. #6.  Though the value of the GH2 will drop when the GH3 comes out - selling a GH2 won't be difficult.  As a matter of fact GH2 prices "went up" once the hacks improved in quality. #7.  What happens if the GH3 comes out and it isn't hackable or isn't able to keep up with a hacked GH2?  Might be difficult to get a GH2 at a decent price. #8.  Canon is getting their I-frame DSLRs ready for market as well if you have the extra cash for a more expensive camera - they will likely trounce Nikon and continue their dominance (though I personally don't care for Canon) unless Panasonic aim MUCH higher - ie pricing a GH3 or a new M4/3s camera in the $2000+ market. As to what we "could" (or want) expect from a GH3 * Sensor with greater dynamic range * Increased color gamut * 60p or 120p at 1080 resolution * Raw - like a CinemaDNG file output (dream) * Sensor with improved low light performance * Higher Res OLED viewfinder and or LCD screen * Clean HDMI out * 100% weatherproof design (dream) * Access to flat color profile picture style

[quote author=Giovassi link=topic=290.msg1891#msg1891 date=1329768585] Sara, you say: My boyfriend used that guide (above) a lot when he shot digital medium format. I don't understand if this is done in Post-color correction or with in the camera, if this is the case I would be very interested to know how he does it. Before starting this post I was working with Kelvin colors, the GH2 allows you to chance color gradation, but I didn't go very far. Thanks [/quote] Post.  Shooting a Hassy or Mamiya or Pentax 645 medium format digital gives you access to a raw file.  The GH2 does not thus getting skin tone corrent in camera is very important.  Cameras like the Ikonoskop, Red, Alexa, Sony F35/F65 produce raw files that alow for accurate color tweaks in post. But to answer your question, you are doing it correct - the GH2 just doesn't have many options for color correction.  A few landscape and wildlife GH2 users I know travel with Expodics - though pricey - for nailing color on lacation and avoiding correction later.  Buy a large size and you can use step up rings to have it fit most of your lenses. [url=http://www.expoimaging.com/]http://www.expoimaging.com/[/url] [url=http://tiny.cc/3yd7g]http://tiny.cc/3yd7g[/url] :)

Andrew is right and I (and hundreds of others on personalview) have tested this extensively. You never want to run any gamma/color profile that underexposes a digital sensor for the sake of a "look."  Adobe produced this PDF warning people about the problems associated with underexposure and how digital sensors are different than film.  Also remember that exposure is heavily related to color depth as well - ie "raising shadows" not only introduces digital noise, but also increase the rate of false color and image posterization.  Ugly and makes productions reek of "cheap video." [url=http://wwwimages.adobe.com/www.adobe.com/content/dam/Adobe/en/products/photoshop/pdfs/linear_gamma.pdf]http://wwwimages.adobe.com/www.adobe.com/content/dam/Adobe/en/products/photoshop/pdfs/linear_gamma.pdf[/url] From what we can tell, smooth and nostalgic (lots of warmth however) give the most dynamic range - very important because that is "somewhat" a small weakness of the GH2's sensor.  I am not arguing with your results - it does indeed look like your cinema shot after editing is flatter, but again I think that editing the smooth would produce a similar or better result. Also remember that all these settings have adjustments you can make as well - Nearly all the GH2 "pros" shooting little productions I know of shoot Smooth -2,-2,0,-2 (leaving color alone because we need color information due to the 4:2:0 nature of the GH2 output)

[url=http://www.sam-mallery.com/2011/11/an-ez-guide-to-hacking-the-panasonic-gh2/]http://www.sam-mallery.com/2011/11/an-ez-guide-to-hacking-the-panasonic-gh2/[/url] Vitally makes the Ptools program that lets you install the Quantum and Aquamotion and Flomotion hacks. [url=http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/953/gh2-patch-vault-most-popular-patches-in-one-place.]http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/953/gh2-patch-vault-most-popular-patches-in-one-place.[/url] Install 1.1 then the hack of your choice. Have fun!