Ernesto Mantaras

Well, this looks very interesting. I wonder how good it'll be in low light, since I'm used to shooting at f1.8 with my Sigma 18-35mm, so I'd be losing around 1 stop shooting only up at 1600 ISO. Would you say 3200 compares better or worse to the GH2's 1250 ISO, @Andrew?

Now this is getting me going. I was just about to make my jump to the GH4, but just like you did with the GH2 back in the day, you're making me reconsider my purchase, Andrew.

There is a big difference in price, but the lack of V-Log L and the recording limit, as well as the lack of mic jack are making me doubt this combination. Now the argument is heavy, it is an awesome combination and I'm spending pretty much the same amount.

So, how do you think the G7 stacks up in higher ISOs? Is it better or worse than the GH4?

The slomo from the A7s and the G4are not useful for any kind of commercial application.  Way too soft.  

The GH4 may be soft at 96fps, but shoot at 50 or 60fps and you're in back in full HD, way more detailed than the 5DIII's 1080p (almost the same as 1080p24 on the GH4). And still at 96fps it stands a lot better than Canon's 720p...

Lol.. why buy an MD when you have a full range of cheap old minolta lenses with autofocus that work perfectly on the A mount.

Wow. Do you shoot video or photos? I bought it for my GH2, and MD lenses have manual iris and a beautiful focus ring. So there.

I don't like that A mount on the Sony. Why no E mount? What's the "adaptabilty" on the Alphas? I remember I bought an MD lens that came with an MD to A adapter and it had a lens for infinity focus... :S

 

If you want to see some new GH4 footage...including the 10 bit 422 via 'break out box" i.e. DMW-YAGH Interface Unit... to AJA recorder....

I

 

Published on Apr 6, 2014

Adorama TV presents the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 and Interface Unit. Join Michael Artsis as he explores the features of this new 4K camera and showcases its stunning footage.

 

AJA Ki Pro Quad
http://www.adorama.com/AJPAK256.html

 

•  

 

Wow, that review sucked!

I wouldn't dismiss a CMOS-based camera just because of rolling shutter seen during a 180 fast pan whilst a train is passing by in the background! I think it could be another good tool for bringing 4K to the masses, just like the gh4 and BM. We'll see how it performs soon though! 

That was a pretty slow pan... :S

There are plenty of examples in which a higher resolution image has been binned to a lower resolution with a higher bit depth.  The tecnique is mainly used to reduce noise and increase camera sensitivity and to maintain rich colors in post production transfers.

 

Again, using such a process on a captured image can never increase color depth.  So, barring and inefficiencies/inequities in the conversion process or the display devices, the resulting images should look the same (except that one has more resolution).

 

In addition, it is usless to try and compare such results, unless there are two display devices of identical size that can be set to correspond to the bit-depth and resolution inherent in each image.  Displaying a 32-bit image on a 16-bit monitor would be a waste of time when assessing the results of binning to a lower resolution to a higher bit depth.

But the difference between 8-bit and 16-bit is pretty obvious and more in the ballpark of this test.

However, since most of us don't have 4K monitors maybe the test won't be very evident.

And from what I understand (and most here agree), bit depth can't be improved, can it? It's only the color sampling that actually improves.

Yes! I think EOSHD should take an official stand on this

 

BMCC: Black Magic Cinema Camera

BMPC: Black Magic Production Camera

BMPO: Black Magic Pocket

I think the Black Magic Pocket Cinema Camera (that's the full name, right?) goes like BMPCC. So that's one more C thatn the Production Camera.
Actually I thought I was seeing wrong and my mind was closing the C. I think BMPCC is easier to difference on the spot than BMPO which at first sight might confuse some (or maybe just me) that it's written BMPC.

Well, I'm nitpicking, just saying since it's the first time ever I've read "BMPO" anywhere.

Let's have a look at my first comment - 

"I'll watch the 4K file when it comes out but just comparing the streamed versions of both, 5D3 raw looks more appealing to me, color quality especially. "

 

Vimeo converts any file format you upload to their own file format for streaming. You know what this means? It's called a level playing field. If you shoot something at 6K with a Red Dragon and upload it to Vimeo and you upload another video shot by a 5D3 at 1920 x 1080p, I don't care what Vimeo does, the Red 6K file converted by Vimeo better look more detailed than the 5D3 one, especially if the subject matter is nearly identical.

 

Let's look at my next comment, written minutes later - 

 

"I'm comparing both streamed and downloaded ORIGINAL FILE versions and Genesis blows it away. PERCEIVED RESOLUTION Andrew. Thanks for the update that it was shot in different light. Obviously the 4K will have more resolution on paper and with the original file(4K) but the 5D3 at 1920 x 720 looks more appealing to me than the BMC piece at 1920 x 1080(which is being streamed as of right now). Just my opinion. "

 

Key words to read and comprehend are ORIGINAL FILE. The BMC4K piece original file is 1920 x 1080p and 5D3 piece original file is 1920 x 720p, so I really am not understanding why you think the BMC4K original file downloaded from Vimeo is 720p when it's the 5d3 piece that's 720p. Please clear this up for me. 

Sure, let me clear this up for you.
I read all you comments and, to start clearing things up, I perhaps was confused by your key words to read, which got contradicted when you mentioned that "the 5D3 at 1920 x 720 looks more appealing to me than the BMC piece at 1920 x 1080(which is being streamed as of right now).", since the streamed version was 720p at the time you commented this (and at the time I mentioned that you had watched a 720p file if you only watched the streamed version). So did you actually watch the streamed version at 720p or the original uploaded file at 1080p. To see the answer, jump over the next paragraph.

But, since you were being condescendent to me, let me clear this bit up for you first: Vimeo only converts to 1080p by request of the user and only if he/she is a Plus or Pro member. Do you know what that means? It means Vimeo tries to save bandwidth (and perhaps take care of the users with lesser machines that maybe can't play 1080p right). Well, that's speculation on my part. But you don't care what Vimeo does. So let me tell you: did you know there's a little button to the left of the "full screen" button on the Vimeo player that allows you to see the real pixels (only when you're in full screen, mind you)? Thanks to that you can see whether or not the user who uploaded the video has upgraded it to 1080p or not. James hadn't at the time you started all this (and you could also tell by looking at the download options). But you can tell whether or not a video is 720p or 1080p, right? I mean, since we're coming from 4K, it should be pretty obvious.
Yet, again, the BMPC video at the time of discussion was being streamed at 720p (1280x720 that is) and the 5D video was being streamed at 1080p (1920x720 is 1080p cropped, you see) and you didn't notice there was an obvious difference that could very well be due to Vimeo's de facto system? Oh, right, you don't care what Vimeo does. So why argue?

No argument then. It's enough to just take a look at the pictures you uploaded in >this post, comparing the BMPC video and the 5D video, saying how bad the first one was, how soft and all... You see, that pic tells you off. It comes from a 720p video, even if the file's resolution is 1920x1080. So indeed you were comparing a 720p video next to a 1080p video (and not the 1080p originals like you're trying to make us believe you did) and saying the first one looked soft. Well, of course!

Just to be clearer still, here's your grab next to the current 1080p upgraded streaming version of the BMPC video. You're welcome.

Sorry for my tone, but I don't like being condescended. Your statement was confusing and I thought your opinion on the resolution of the BMPC made no sense, so it had to be that (according to the second part of the conflicting paragraph) you had watched the streamed 720p version of the video to arrive to such conclusion, and not the originally 1080p uploaded file. You confirmed my suspicion with your posted framegrab and still you you denied it and talked down on me. Why not have a little self-criticism?

Now we go back to discussing dynamic range, tonality, grading and all that.

Cheers!

 

Where have you seen the 4K prores original file of this entire piece? Madness that I can't watch an imaginary 4K prores file of the entire piece (not one clip from the entire edit uploaded to wetransfer) that you seem to have watched. Read what thedest has posted, he actually comprehended and fully understood what I had to say. 

 

Yet you started this thing by comparing a 720p video from the BMPC and a 1080p video from the 5D. At least rethink your arguments over a new comparison either having them both at 720p or both at 1080p and see how it holds up.

It would be great if someone with access to a Canon 1D C tested this.

I second you. I don't know if there's anyone in this forum that has a 1DC, but if you do or have access to one that'd be great.

Oooor does anyone know if there's any raw footage, a clip that comes from the camera and is uploaded in some site?

Perhaps we could ask Philip Bloom? :P

At first I was very excited, but thinking this over I don't really see how 8bit would turn into 10bit. 4:2:0 to 4:4:4 is definitely right (and I'm wondering if there are any DNxHD flavors to save that info) but one thing is to change the color sampling by downrezzing, and another to increase the color palette by doing this.

I guess some testing needs to be done. Probably 4K footage from the 1DC would be a good subject?

Maybe I'm not alone here being an owner of the Bmcc, but does it seem that nearly everything these (black magic) cams crank out is tinted blue?

Folks are all likely using the same LUTs being passed around so that likely contributes to seeing the same bias and error in a lot of footage.  I would be curious to see these cameras graded through an ACES color pipeline rather than subjective stabs at just trying to achieve a decent, baseline log-to-lin.

At least in this case, doesn't it look more like a grading decision? Sort of like a cross-processing, with the blue channel lifted in the lows and lowered in the highs.

(...) but the 5D3 at 1920 x 720 looks more appealing to me than the BMC piece at 1920 x 1080(which is being streamed as of right now). Just my opinion. 

The streamed video for the BMPC is at 720p, not at 1080p.

Great insight, Andrew! I'm very excited about this camera. I just hope internal 4:2:2 will be available as an option and the low light performance is improved over the GH3. And possibly at $1,499 in the US??? I'm definitely getting it still.

And about the 4K crop factor, is it only present in 4K or is 2.3x also present in 1080p? And would a BlackMagic Cinema Camera Speed Booster work on the camera? I remember you mentioning there's a protuberance that interferes with the shutter (in the GH3 at least) so it can't be used on a Panasonic camera. But what if I don't care about stills? It's just physically impossible?

Great insight, Andrew! I'm very excited about this camera. I just hope internal 4:2:2 will be available as an option and the low light performance is improved over the GH3.

And about the 4K crop factor, is it only present in 4K or is 2.3x also present in 1080p? And would a BlackMagic Cinema Camera Speed Booster work on the camera? I remember you mentioning there's a protuberance that interferes with the shutter (in the GH3 at least) so it can't be used on a Panasonic camera. But what if I don't care about stills? It's just physically impossible?

That's great! Looks like the 18-35 has a lot of overhead, since the 2x sensor on the GH3 goes all the way up to 1.42 with the Speed Booster. Nice.

I still have my beloved GH2 with me (bought thanks to you) after almost two years and didn't quite have a reason to get a GH3 apart from the 1080p60. Now here I have a Sigma 18-35 waiting to be speedboosted, so maybe it'd be time to make the switch? I'd really like that 60p.
Now... knowing there's a GH4 coming, regardless of 4K, maybe I should wait. But it's cool to know that I'll be able to use the Speed Booster on it (unless for some crazy reason it also comes with a multi-aspect ratio sensor!)

And these Blackmagic versions of the SB just got things more complicated for me... I can only buy one right now...

Anyways, I haven't been forced to use 30p (neither have I had the luck to shoot with it on a IBIS camera!) so I don't like it, although I understand the benefits. But I can't get over the TV effect I get with it, with that miniature HFR smoothness of motion.

It'd be great to have options and in any case just choose it if it's best for the job, not be enclosed in one single option by the manufacturers.

Thanks for this important insight, Andrew!

Great review as always, Andrew. :)

I'm seriously considering the Olympus, but I hope they come to their senses and add 24p (although the phase detect artifact is also a turn-off).

I recently finished post production for a short film that was shot at 29.97p and the director wanted it converted into 24p for festivals. For the most part you won't notice it if there isn't a lot of movement, but I can easily spot the jerkiness that comes from losing a frame around every 6 frames.

By the way, I noticed you had the Sigma 18-35 on the GH3 using the Speed Booster. Does it vignette? Is it useable?

Cool! Congratulations, Andrew! I'd love to do a new piece for the contest but I don't know if I'll have the time. I'll do my best to get something new out of the door soon, though.

Still I wonder, does this qualify as "no more than 25%" of CGI in the film?

largely depends on the codec, R3Ds for example are so easy on processor and GPU;

not full res. and not the best solution but i cut 5K on samsung i7 8Gb SSD raid0.

when i have R3Ds and 5DmkIII footage on the same timeline DSLR footage takes a lot more of processing power, hacked GH2  footage is a killer, and i have fast PC.

I guess you never edited intra footage from the GH2. I've found it a breeze to edit when I shot with Driftwood's Sedna or similar intra patches, unlike with long-GOP files.

I apologize for being late to the game, but if I were to purchase the BM pocket camera from BHPhoto, would this version have the 4k ability/option or something close? In other words, I did see where a certain firmware wasn't offered yet and I was curious if this has been address.

Also, any idea on wait times regarding this camera?

Thanks.

Perhaps you have mixed information with the Blackmagic Production Cinema Camera or maybe the FS-700? But the Pocket Camera is only a 1080p camera, there's no firmware that will add 4K resolution to it.

Has anyone been able to try the 18-35mm with a Speed Booster on a GH2 and GH3, to know to what extent it can be used in them? I'm considering to buy this combination (as soon as the Speed Booster comes back in stock).

Thanks for this test, Andrew! I've been waiting to see footage from this configuration for a long time. Glad to see it looks great in the right hands (though I still have to boo the Warp Stabilizer, as much as it has saved a couple of shots!)

I have one specific doubt I'd appreciate you clear for me: does the focus ring in the Nikon version of this lens rotate the Nikon or the Canon way? I guess I could get used to the Nikon way in time, but it'd make it a much easier decision to buy this lens+adapter combo if I know I won't have to change directions.

Alsot, until I get the Pocket I'll be using the Sigma+SB on the GH2. Could you please post a couple of screenshots showing how this lens looks using it with a Speed Booster in the Panasonic?

Thanks again!

Maybe they're saying the C300 is equivalent to a 70D.

They are pretty much saying that, and it's ridiculous.