sanveer

Sharpness -5 looks a bit too unsharp for my taste, so I leave it at -2. But the difference is very subtle.

Color at -5 takes out a lot of color, so I'm not sure if it's the best to always have it at -5. Maybe also better to leave it around -3 or -2, so you don't loose to much color information.

I have to admit.. I just bought a GH2 second hand. If the GH3 would be actually available right now I might have considered it. I really like it. Going on holidays soon and planning to use it, so I didn't want to wait for the GH3. Also the price difference is big.. Bought the GH2 body for a bit more than 1/3 of the GH3 body price.

[quote name='sanveer' timestamp='1352489907' post='21423']


Maybe everyone on EOSHD, can send a video of their's, pretending to be (or impersonating) one of the freaks from one of these discussion groups, and then, we could color correct all the footage, and make it into a short. We could chose screen names, similar to some characters, in one of these forums. :D

that would be Hilarious ...
[/quote]

+1

[quote name='QuickHitRecord' timestamp='1352489173' post='21420']


Now that's a short video skit just [i]begging[/i] to be made.
[/quote]

What's funny is, somebody whipped out forum senority on him in one comment, lol.

"Who the f-ck do you think you are anyway... "Junior Member"...?! You know how many posts i've got!? Your opinion doesn't even MATTER, for another 319, son! Check out my handle.. It says 'veteran". ....HIGHLIGHTED! I'm a damn dyed in the wool forum american icon! I eat trolls & sh-t noobs for breakfast."

[quote name='Germy1979' timestamp='1352488356' post='21416']
[/quote]

Now that's a short video skit just [i]begging[/i] to be made.

[quote name='sanveer' timestamp='1352487808' post='21415']
hahaha ... apparently one hapless sould tried to reason and figure out why, but, it didn't, apparently, help ... :P

Lmao.. Dp review... Weird...

If filmmaking forum was a city, dp review would be like, a dark alley at 2:00 am in Compton.


http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3296058
[/quote]

relevant:
12-35 2.8 on a gh2.

it's on youtube so @0:50 just might be a compression thing, but take a loot. all the usual suspects are present in a godamn high degree.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3u4m7u0oqig

On the moire issues I think some perspective is required. Some of the pixel-obsession on forums like Personal-View is so over the top it is ridiculous. These guys never shoot anything worthwhile just obsess over small things.

Glad the discussion here is far more level-headed.

There's an approximate 20 point list of benefits over the previous model overall. Many pros and amateurs alike happily shoot with the 7D, 60D, T2i, NEX 5N, NEX 7 and those cameras have FAR MORE moire than the GH3 gave me on that shoot. Perspective!!

It's clear that you two have very different esthetics. I happen to agree with Sanveer about early Batman films. Yuck. The new Nolan ones are better but that's not saying much. I mean, for the most part I like them and I'm entertained but they all still exhibit the same basic flaw to me: To many villains, to much action and not enough character building. They just cram as much as they can in to keep the film moving. It's like they are so obsessed with action that they think even the tiniest quite moments need to be stripped from the story so they don't slow things. You can kind of say that about all super hero movies though. The only one I was ever impressed with was the second spiderman movie. Not because it's an amazing movie or anything. But it was the first time i've seen them let a movie like that stop and let the characters emote. in particular there's this scene with Peter Parker talking to his aunt where he tells her it was his fault that his Uncle died and instead of her instantly forgiving him (like you would expect) she's so upset, she can't even talk to him. to me It was like, thank you for allowing a character in a movie to be a human. On the other hand, Nolan's Batman seem so flat and predictable. And I'm totally confused by Christian Bail's portrayal of Bruce Wayne. What advantage does he gain by pretending to be a dick all the time? Why not just be a dick all the time? ;-) On top of that, Christian Bail just give me the creeps.

I used to be a big [font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif][color=#282828]Scorsese fan but frankly, his new films do nothing for me. What was that one... Hugo? Ugh... Totally not my thing. And not because it's a kids movie either. I've seen lots of very entertaining kids movies. One thing I can't stand is when a sound track tries to take over and dictate the emotion of the scene. It's like, "Oh something funny's going! I can tell because the silly music started." To me, it's like having a voice over telling me when I should laugh or feel sad. Yeah, that movie really bugged me. [/color][/font]

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.

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.

[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? ;)

LOL! Okay that's a lot more funny now that I see the actual page and fully understand what this is all about. At first I thought it was some random scam.

I love this one:

[url="http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/551949_355071424531562_336226327_n.jpg"][img]http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/551949_355071424531562_336226327_n.jpg[/img][/url]

And this one:

[url="http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/530082_360240997347938_1111608410_n.jpg"][img]http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/530082_360240997347938_1111608410_n.jpg[/img][/url]

[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='charlie_orozco' timestamp='1351365867' post='20443']
This moiré problem we're seeing is definitely a processing problem in the hardware department. But I bet it is plenty capable of resolving images without moiré, so I guess the scaling method could be improved or the architecture modified to solve this without losing all of the other things the GH3 does get right.
It does bother me that the so called "wide dynamic range" isn't really there either (although I saw picture shot with the High Dynamic Range profile and it looked Cinestyle like a bit).

Could it be that the small delay has been stated to solve it?
[/quote]In the GH2, only a portion of the sensor was used for the video, and the down scaling wasn't the usual method, used in other sensors. Therefore, presumably, the circuitry was in order.

Maybe, the GH3 has a better sensor, than the GH2, notwithstanding the smaller size (and disengaging the multi-aspect ration bit, and disabling the ETC, for video). But, merely because a sensor (and even the processor), is better, doesn't mean that the camera's video and stills would be. In the newer sensors, circuity is extremely complicated (especially in the back-lilluminated ones). The GH3 may not have a back-illuminated one (GOD only knows the exact kind of sensor it has), but,I am guessing, that Panasonic has to seriously tweak a lot of things, including circuitry and codec.

After the benchmark the GH2, set, for video, the only sensible way, would have been, either a 2.5-2.7k video,or a 2k video, with the dynamic range of atleast 2-3 points higher, and much flatter colour profile. This without Any Moire or Aliasing. This is something, which is Clearly lacking in the GH3.

I am guessing (that) the delay, was due to not getting their act in order. They chose Photokina, because, otherwise, they would have had to showcase at some smaller, less prestigious, venue. If Panasonic is afraid that the GH3 will eat into their Professional Video Camera market, then, they should think of the revenues only in terms of numbers and not the profit margins. If the GH3 shoots anywhere near the Alexa or C300 (or even the C100), then, it would easily outsell the GH2, Many Times Over, and most people who picked up one GH2, would easily be tempted to get 2 GH3s, instead. This apart from all the new buyers. Also,people thinking of picking up any of the Canon duds including the 5D Mark II and Mark II and their C100 and C300, would have a good enough reason to move to the GH3. Maybe other models like by Nikon and Sony also could be passed over, for a GH3. Panasonic should think of things, from a broader perspective, and from a quantity perspective, rather than larger margins, per camera.

Wow, you guys need to calm down. The elitist mentality needs to be put away, this is a forum. You're not going to be winning any awards here, dont take things to personal.

don't EVER focus on a steadycam or any other stabilizer. Keep the aperture around f5.6 (or higher), and the closest thing from you, should be Atleast 3 feet (preferably double that, if possible). Everything should be in focus, at the same time.The sole purpose of the steadycam, is to make panning, without rails, smooth. Focus doesn't have to adjust the depth of field. For those, shots on tripods make sense.

Oh and sanveer I.dynamic and I. Resolution turned off

[quote name='sanveer' timestamp='1351028859' post='20195']
Oh, ok. Thats why (possibly) John's (Twigt) video seemed sharper (he set everything at '0'). But, this new video, of yours, is pretty sharp.[/quote]
I also have the impression the compression on Vimeo is less harsh. Especially Vimeo 1080p looks much better than YouTube 1080p. I'll be uploading some original footage onto a ftp soon, via a helpful member here. That'll do :)

[quote name='sanveer' timestamp='1336678300' post='11806']
I apologize for not posting any videos with the FLAT PROFILE. I've just been travelling (for personal reasons, and not work), and haven't found any coloring/ grading software, to work with.
Please give me a little time. Maybe by this weekend, i should be able to upload a footage from the profile.
tc
[/quote]

Dude, did you ever follow up with this?

Get the new firmware here for the 5D Mark III

The 2nd Alpha release of Magic Lantern for the 5D Mark III brings a very useful feature for anamorphic shooters such as I, a real-time anamorphic aspect ratio preview in live view. This is extremely useful for shooting bare bones with an anamorphic lens, or for those with no monitor / EVF that supports anamorphic de-squeeze.

[quote name='sanveer' timestamp='1350679480' post='20005']
Julian, could you please compose identical frames (by mouthing the 2 cameras together, on the same Tripod, or 2 tripods, placed closeby), also, thereby shooting the Exactly same thing, at the Exact same time.
Thanks in Advance ;)
[/quote]
My idea... :-)
[img]http://www.eoshd.com/comments/uploads/gallery/album_16/med_gallery_20742_16_929748.png[/img]

I have acces to two 14-140mm's, but not this weekend. And since my adapters are missing.. i'm stuck to testing the 12-35mm against a 40mm prime, which is quite a difference. Also, the lack of multi-aspect sensor makes quite a difference.. The GH2 is quite wider.

I was doing some low light tests, the findings were quite interesting...but I think I fucked up the aperture so I have to reshoot it. I'll get back with some screenshots tonight.

Here's an example of the live view image before recording and during record. This was at iso 3200 (or could have been 1600), with the natural profile everything at -5. The difference is very big..

[URL=http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/113-gh3-live-view/][IMG]http://www.eoshd.com/comments/uploads/gallery/album_16/gallery_20742_16_305372.png[/IMG][/URL]
[URL=http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/112-gh3-recording/][IMG]http://www.eoshd.com/comments/uploads/gallery/album_16/gallery_20742_16_1124525.png[/IMG][/URL]

The guys are in there, playing with the codec and trying to improve it, I guess they should know their resolutions by now.

The Mark III was quite a bit better in low light in comparison to the Mark II. Not a full stop better, but still noticeable.

For me, if the Mark III had cost the same as the Mark II, I would have called a decent upgrade. But it didn't. It cost $1,000 [i]more[/i] than the Mark II at launch. That is unacceptable.

Also, for future sensors, the few tests of the 1DX that are out show a sensor with excellent performance -- true, next-generation performance. Unfortunately, in grand, arrogant-as-hell Canon fashion, they only put their good sensor in their most wildly expensive camera. Can't afford it? They don't care. They're the telephone company.

How much ya wanna' bet that an interchangeable lens mount is in the near future? It seems like the next logical step for them. Their system is popular, powerful, with loads of accessories being made by multiple companies. An exclusive revenue stream of GoPro lenses could earn them reams of money.

The only consideration that comes to mind is sensor size. Once you go ILC, you have to keep the sensor fixed. That could pose a problem.

I think it's only a matter of time until GoPro leverage CineForm Raw with a cinema camera of their own. I'd say it will be their next product line. They're much more likely to put up a serious fight for BMD's market than any of the Japanese giants.