sanveer

Julian, did I notice you changing from 72Mbps to 50Mbps bit rate, for video,before using the ETC? Does the ETC work with the 72Mbps? I've added your points to the list. [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Key improvements on the GH3:[/font][/color] [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]1. Weather Sealing.[/font][/color] [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]2. 2.5mm to 3.5mm mic in.[/font][/color] [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]3. Sound Monitoring (through headphone jack).[/font][/color] [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]4. Colours are slightly more flat (though not flat enough).[/font][/color] [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]5. Longer lasting battery, and grip option available.[/font][/color] [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]6. Better LCD and EVF. Though, the screen, suddenly, look very blue. Even the grass and everything that is green, has a strange hue of blue.[/font][/color] [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]7. Bluetooth and Wi-fi (one works, at a time, though, the GH3 has, apparently, both).[/font][/color] [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]8. [/font][/color][color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]1080p60[/font][/color] [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]9. Substantially Improved photo quality (this has to be verified)[/font][/color] [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]10. 72mbit mov[/font][/color] [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]11. Time code display[/font][/color] [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Where it doesn't seem to have improved, or not improved enough:[/font][/color] [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]1. Video quality (still visible noise, under certain conditions, though slightly less).[/font][/color] [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]2. Comparatively Low Dynamic.[/font][/color] [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]3. Picture Quality is improved, marginally, though not really enough.[/font][/color] [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Where it has deteriorated:[/font][/color] [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]1. Sudden appearance of noticeable Moire and Aliasing.[/font][/color] [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]2. Video doesn't seem as sharp (though, in some videos, people state, that, it appears to be, almost, equally sharp. I am not sure I agree with it being sharper, or even close to, as sharp as the GH2).[/font][/color] [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]3. The sensor is not Multi-Aspect Ratio, anymore.[/font][/color] [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]4. The ETC is not available for 72Mbps video. And ONLY for photos, of low to mid resolution. Also,it has been reduced from 2.6x to 2x.[/font][/color] [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]5. It is suddenly bulkier, and a tad heavier (marginally).[/font][/color] [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]6. Cost of the camera has gone up, substantially.[/font][/color]

Lets make a genuine analysis, rather than play favorites. Key improvements on the GH3: 1. Weather Sealing. 2. 2.5mm to 3.5mm mic in. 3. Sound Monitoring (through headphone jack). 4. Colours are slightly more flat (though not flat enough). 5. Longer lasting battery, and grip option available. 6. Better LCD and EVF. Though, the screen, suddenly, look very blue. Even the grass and everything that is green, has a strange hue of blue. 7. Bluetooth and Wi-fi (one works, at a time, though, the GH3 has, apparently, both). Where it doesn't seem to have improved, or not improved enough: 1. Video quality (still visible noise, under certain conditions, though slightly less). 2. Comparatively Low Dynamic. 3. Picture Quality is improved, marginally, though not really enough. Where it has deteriorated: 1. Sudden appearance of noticeable Moire and Aliasing. 2. Video doesn't seem as sharp (though, in some videos, people state, that, it appears to be, almost, equally sharp. I am not sure I agree with it being sharper, or even close to, as sharp as the GH2). 3. The sensor is not Multi-Aspect Ratio, anymore. 4. The ETC has gone from Video (Completely), and is available, ONLY for photos, of low to mid resolution. 5. It is suddenly bulkier, and a tad heavier (marginally). 6. Cost of the camera has gone up, substantially. [The GH2 did cost around $ 1300-1500, but, only at launch time, and, with the 14-140 lens. Also, since it was Not available, for a long time, and there were series of offers, on the camera, the price was about $899 for the body only, or so. I am not exactly sure, but, sometime around mid to end of 2011, the GH2 + 14-140 lens cost around $ 1155 (on offers) or $1300 (without offer). I am not absolutely sure, of the exact pricing, because most prices, seem to have been removed, from their relevant dates, and the one, that I found, don't seem completely accurate.] Please feel free, to add, to this list, or post you opinion or feedback or corrections.

[quote name='Julian' timestamp='1351854415' post='20860'] According to Panasonic firmware 0.5 is representative for the final product. "[b]EXTC is there, it doesn't work in 72mbit movie recording, only at lower bitrates.[/b]" Don't forget the GH3 isn't a video camera. I remember a quote from a Panasonic guy saying the GH3 is 50/50 photo/video, while the GH2 was more like 40/60. Watch the official [url="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_m-Iwpc_qdg"]promo-video[/url] for the GH3. It starts with a landscape photographer, then Macro, then people, and then Cinema... The stills quality is greatly improved over the GH2. I think Panasonic went for a Sony sensor (if they did make it in-house it'd probably still have mutli-aspect at least) to be able to keep up with the rest (OM-D, Sony NEX etc) in the stills market. And because of this they couldn't do the same magic as with the sensor in the GH2. It is a hybrid camera, the big improvements are in the photography department. Yes, it sucks for us... it's not what we want, but the GH3 is a major improvement over the GH2 overall. [/quote] Where did you get, that the ETC mode doesn't work at lower bit rates. It is disabled completely for video, and also for higher resolution pics. Read Kassim's Post: [url="http://www.freeimagehosting.net/e3i28"]http://www.freeimagehosting.net/e3i28[/url] and [url="http://www.freeimagehosting.net/ipsgx"]http://www.freeimagehosting.net/ipsgx[/url] I think, we should have a shootout, between the GH2 and the GH3. I think the difference in stills will be very little, and the GH2 may be, a tad better, at video. Suddenly, I am wondering, whether getting a Sony sensor, was such a great idea.

[quote name='charlie_orozco' timestamp='1351847083' post='20856'] Those "strange artifacts" were the shitty YouTube compression trying to intepret the grain I added. Big mistake on my part (it's the first time I added it in a whole video). I looks great uncompressed, but it looks quite bad on YouTube, didn't take that into account. Will upload a bit of the video in DNxHD so you can see what I'm talking about. Anyways, those "shooting star" artifacts are nowhere to be seen. Did you continue to watch beyond those first few seconds? [/quote] hahaha ... i must confess, that, I didn't watch the video, maybe, beyond 15-20 seconds. I already found noise, and so,I stopped viewing :P

I find Jim Jannard's behavior of sudden co-incidences, very suspicion arousing. It must a celestial superball event, greater than any, Ever, that Both, a truckload of Red one cameras were ordered by someone (whose name, was conveniently NOT disclosed), ONLY for lease, for some film, and then were given back, after the shoot. Also, Jim did not tell him, How many TruckLoads of cameras were ordered by this great incumbent. AND That, suddenly RED Seems to have realised, that, their investments on their Entire Range, SIMULTANEOUSLY has been recovered, and so are offering discounts, reducing they prices to half of their original prices. Oh, yes, another co-incidence, is that they have (suddenly) built an incredibly efficient factory in Irvine, California, fund better suppliers,lowered assembly costs etc etc. ([size=4][font=courier new', courier, monospace]We have built an incredibly efficient factory in Irvine, California and over time learned how to make EPICs in quantity, lowered our assembly costs, found better suppliers and fully paid off our NRE. When we assembled the 1st EPIC camera in Stage 6 at RED Studios Hollywood it took our team 12 hours. It took two more days to de-bug. Today we can assemble an EPIC in 13 minutes and 95+% need no re-work after diagnostics and testing. It is a testament to our manufacturing team and supply chain teams.[/font][/size][color=#444444][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=4][i])[/i][/size][/font][/color] I don't know how the RED guys do it, but, their stream of co-incidences, never end. Maybe, they should be re-christened Co-Incidence Cameras, instead of RED Cameras.

hahaha ... :D

[quote name='Leon Yiu' timestamp='1351823359' post='20843'] I'd like to chip in my two cents. On wednesday night I went to see skyfall at the vue in westfield stratford city where the sony 4k projection system is constantly advertised. The picture appeared particularly soft, possibly as a result of upscaling, another thing about the song 4k projectors is that the frame is cropped rather than the use of an anamorphic lens and masking, I found the black bars on the top and bottom distracting even if black levels in the sony projectors are better than other digital cinemas and film. Before seeing skyfall I was watching 4k videos from youtube on the 15inch macbook pro with retina display, obviously this is comparing apples to oranges, the cinema picture is way larger and lcds pixel structure is crisper. The sound however was incredibly impressive, best I've ever heard, sounds realistic albeit directional. Today I went to Harrods to have a look at the 84inch sony 4k tv as a frame of reference, it was like 4 42inch 1080p tvs together resolution wise, I felt the detail was better than in the cinema yesterday, but once again the screen was much bigger, and I've failed to mention until now I was on the second from last row. [/quote] Could you post urls for the 4k videos on Youtube. I thought Youtube downsized all those videos to 2k.

[quote name='charlie_orozco' timestamp='1351816027' post='20826'] This is what I have at hand. The shots of the guitar player and picking the guitar up and playing it with the skylight behind is an example. I had to lift the lows quite a bit in all of those shots. EDIT: it's exactly the thumbnail shot that I'm talking about, and all those shot from the same angle. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZ44i0Woa6E[/media] [/quote] There is Quite a bit of noise in your video (on the staircase, and the seats, etc etc). I just saw a few seconds of the start, and there was already a lotta noise (strange artefacts). [quote name='KarimNassar' timestamp='1351788409' post='20798'] I wondered if it was my camera that was faulty but then I saw it in others people footage like the vimeo link I posted. Maybe you guys should try to pull the shadows all the way up and see if it's there? or maybe it is specific to the flowmotion hack? [/quote] Naah, i don't think its got to do with the FlowMotion Hack. All settings, with very high contrast,and very low light scenes have it. I saw it in the 5D videos too. All cameras with 4-2-0 have it (maybe even with the 4-2-2 have it, though,it may be less noticeable). Though, the noise on the GH2, IMHO,seems to vary,under different circumstances. There are good ISO settings, and there is the ISO bug, and, I also suspect, that, in low light, certain shutter speeds also govern the level of noise. Check this out: [url="http://vimeo.com/18580410#at=0"]http://vimeo.com/18580410#at=0[/url] Its not a big deal, I guess. Everything comes with its limitations. We just have to learn, to work around it. Btw, i realised, that the GH3 has a strange update, on the continuous shooting rate/ high speed burst mode. Whereas, the GH2 shot 4MP pics, at 40 fps, for exactly 1 second, the GH3 does 4MP pics, at 20fps, for 2 seconds. Doesn't, then, the processor power, seem similar? ;)

[quote name='charlie_orozco' timestamp='1351778257' post='20782'] Wow. Not once have I seen that kind of artifacts in my footage. Lucky me! [/quote] Could you please upload footage, in High Contrast, and low light videos? thanks

this 2k, 4k and now 8k resolution, is a never ending race. Its just cheap capitalism. It would be good, if 4k cameras and workflow was (monetarily) manageable for India Filmmakers. Since Panasonic already showcased an 8k TV, this year, we should start having 8k recording cameras, for films, in the next 2-3 years.

[quote name='charlie_orozco' timestamp='1351778257' post='20782'] Wow. Not once have I seen that kind of artifacts in my footage. Lucky me! [/quote] Did u ever shoot, in the dark? With a not-so-fast lens?

Karim, thanks for posting the links. Its some strange noise pattern.

[quote name='KarimNassar' timestamp='1351760452' post='20769'] the gh3, based on what we have seen so far from preproduction models with firmware 0.5 is nothing short of a failure imo. Not only have not upgraded but they have regressed from the gh2. Regression: - apparently less detail rendition - mo more multi aspect sensor - apparently from the user guide there is no more video extended tele mode - introduces moire an aliasing And all of this for more than twice the price of the gh2... We can use caution and wait for the final production models but it is definitively not looking good at all. What is sad is that if they simply kept the strong points of the gh2 without even improving on them. and we still got rid of the shooting stars artifact that is now gone on the gh3, with the weather sealing, headphone jack and battery grip and 72mbps all i mov files that it has now it would already have been a great camera. But those small improvements were traded for a loss in image quality that simply does not make any sense. The only logical justification I can find for this weak upgrade is that if, just like canon on the markIII that did not get the expected upgrade so that it didn't compete with the c100, they are practicing product segmentation and will announce a higer end video camera soon. [/quote] You mentioned the 'shooting star artefact' in your previous post, regarding the video you posted. Do you know any other videos on Vimeo, or even youtube, which show it. What exactly does it look like? Maybe you're right about saving the better features, for the next (higher) segment. Especially considering, that, the AF100 didn't do as well , they were hoping.

Panasonic is making Huge losses, right now (almost US$ 10 Million, and 2nd year in a row. Actually 2 years with similar losses, and 5 years of losses). : [url="http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/panasonic-books-mammoth-925bn-loss/story-e6frea6u-1226507969975"]http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/panasonic-books-mammoth-925bn-loss/story-e6frea6u-1226507969975[/url] It needs to turn around the company. As good samaritans (or customer), lets discuss, where the GH3 falls short, and what it needs to address. We could Exclude things like Global Shutter and other stuff, since, that's not possible, at this stage. I would begin, by suggesting better handling of details, in low light (or very high contrast scenes), instead of that strange banding and those artifacts. I find it curious, that the GH3 is not actually an improvement on the GH2, in firmware, but, most likely, only in hardware. At this rate, they could have just transferred the old GH2 sensor, board, wiring etc etc, along with the firmware, right into the GH3, done (or left it as it is) a few tweaks to the Firmware, and Voila !!!

for US $4 BILLION !!! George Lucas has already milked the franchise, to its last drop. I wonder what made Disney come up with that ridiculous figure (I am guessing, they will make atleast another 6-8 Films, for the Franchise, hoping to collect US$ 500 million, per film, officially turning it into a James Bond parallel. :P Also, there will be millions of Toys, and Atleast 20 Theme Parks, in the next 5 years,around the world. Maybe more :o )

[quote name='basschicago' timestamp='1351712438' post='20729'] Slightly off topic, but I wonder if it's too late in the game for Panasonic to implement global shutter on the GH3, I'm just saying... [/quote] Contrary to how it sounds, global shutter has go to do with the sensors ability to read data out, at certain speeds. For the GH3 to have Global Shutter, they will have to have a New sensor. And, no, a software update would not solve the issue.

hahaha ... i forgot to paste the url. Here it is: [url="http://www.facebook.com/dpredwizard"]http://www.facebook.com/dpredwizard[/url]

I accidentally stumbled upon this Facebook group, in a Google search Basically, you can make a great film on anything that records video. You don't have to have a multi-million dollar production for it. Just don't screw the sound quality.

[quote name='Axel' timestamp='1351540831' post='20553'] @sanveer Upscaling is what a 4k DLP does with normal 2k films. And guess what? The difference is hard to see, although the resolution of, er, [i]true[/i] 4k means four times that of 2k. 'Overly detailed images kill it, for me.' This is no longer about detail. It is about no longer [i]seeing resolution[/i]. And a very well defined image looks more organic, not desperately sharp. 'There is a certain charm in soft dreamy images.' In comparison to the [i]unsharp mask[/i] blockyness with which the details crumble into focus with the DSLRs. You really should go and see the film. In 4k. [/quote] I don't know if India has any 4k screens. I guess, since Reliance is in business (they picked up Dreamworks), so, maybe, in another few months, 4k resolutions theatres will start popping up, suddenly. I guess, if you're going to keep 4k soft and dreamy, like film, then, you're just increasing the size of the projection, ala IMAX. [quote name='andy lee' timestamp='1351553824' post='20558'] I'd like to see GH2 upscaled to 4k and projected!! we should do a test..... [/quote] Dude, would LOVE to see, this one. GH2 @ 4k. It should be shot SUPER SHARP, but, the colors should be a little pale (maybe with some purebred Leica lens) and then softened in upscaling. wow

[quote name='Germy1979' timestamp='1351583230' post='20589'] I think they're just sticking to how awesome their Alexa is now.. Skyfall was uprez'd to 4k from arriraw. I figure that's their angle, lol.. "Shhhhiiiiiit bra!! We don't need 4k! .... Our TWO-k is still better.... Aint nobody watchin' 4k anyway!... Hugo bitchiz!" [/quote] That would be even more embarrassing. If the 2.8k on the Alexa beats the 4k on everyone else ... :P

Great cameras. I always guessed Sony has many advantages over the competition (it manufactures sensors, TVs, Blue Ray, LCD Screen, Tablets, etc etc, basically everything, plus Columbia Tristar Pictures). Though, maybe the F5 and F55, will eat as much into the F700 and F65 territory, a they will, into the EPICs and Alexas. I am guessing that, Arri will be out with a 4k Camera, before the end of the year (maybe they will just put some shit, into a fancy looking housing/ casing, and say its a brilliant 4k camera, with 15 bits of Dynamic Range, and can shoot 240fps @ 4k RAW, and then tell their engineers, to get going, at a war footing. :D Since none will be allowed to review the camera, none would really be able to call the bluff.)

Interesting. Well, if Canon, with the 5D Mark ii, can consistently give us 590 lines of resolution, instead of 1080, why can't Arri call 2.8k RAW a 4k video. I quite frankly doubt the actual resolution that comes out of the 4k cameras, especially in terms of the work than can be done in post. RED Claims a dynamic range of upto 16 stops (I wonder if its even possible), and yet, in most tests, the Alexa (which has a dynamic range of 13 stops) beats it by around 2 stops. Overly detailed images kill it, for me. Films can't look like documentaries. There is a certain charm in soft dreamy images. Even the IMAX images aren't so detailed, that you notice apple flies sitting on fruits, in garden shots. Also, the projection size is enormous, so the image is still cinematic, and not too sharp. One of the things that ruined the select preview for the Hobbit, was the 48fps. Now I believe, James Cameron is taking it to 60fps. Its just making films look too detailed. 4k may be ok, for 2k sized screens, for projecting 3D films, perhaps. Maybe, all of us GH2 owners, should upscale the GH2 to 4k. THAT would be something. :P

people, Please ignore tommy here. Its Vitaly masquerading as the tomcat. i would not hold any grudges against him. he is still, genuinely trying to create a get 4-4-4 out of the 8 bit 4-2-0, that is coming out of the GH2. and, he's not whining. he's genuinely upset ... :P

I am curious. Did you playback the 45 min clip, in-camera (or atleast a portion of it), before transferring it? I am assuming, that: 1. Either the clip was never saved, in the first place (or a very small portion of it was recorded), before it stopped, on its on. 2. While transcoding, through the various software you used, you either changed it into different programs, ruining the final video, somehow, or into a form, which your video player, does not recognise. hmmm ...

Did u unplug your camera after ALL the files were transferred? I am not sure, what exactly, the problem is.