Julian

Also, ISO 125 and 160 (extended) are selectable in video mode but the exposure is exactly the same as iso 200. It shows ISO 125 during recording it doesn't seem to be any different than ISO 200.

Interesting, EXTC only works at lower bitrates. 50mbps mov 24 and 25p. Not at 72mbit and not in any 1080p50 mode either.

Yeah, you can see the mount in the shot on the motorbike in the shadow.

What is a good way to test for banding?

No problem, I'm curious myself as I'm going to make the choice between the GH2 and GH3.. In case of the GH3 I could probably ditch my Canon 5D (mark 1) for photos, the photo quality of the GH2 isn't really good enough.

I don't think wide dynamic range is a marketing term. Don't forget the GH3 is a photo camera more than a video camera. I didn't shoot much pictures yet and there is no proper raw support yet, but I have the idea Panasonic jumped the Sony wagon with this camera. That would mean massive dynamic range, like the OM-D, in raw. They don't claim wdr for video I think... Sadly this new sensor and good photo quality seems to have some downsides for video. I also miss the multi-aspect sensor..

I took the GH3 out into the real world today for some shots. Kept the sharpening at 0. Moire is an issue with bricks sadly... But overall I'm pretty pleased with the image. It is really sharp and full of detail, but then again, the GH2 also is.. The body is much better than the GH2 though. I'm not too happy about the controls yet because a lot changed from the GH2 but that's probably easy to get used to and there are a lot of Fn buttons so it should be fine.

Also did some shots in 1080p50, which is pretty nice. Overall I have a good impression of the colors/toning. It was overcast today so not a lot of contrast, but the image looks good to me. Maybe better than the GH2, but It's hard to compare since the color profiles are so different. I'll put a video of the shots together ASAP.

I'll reshoot the lamp, but I'm afraid moire is here to stay. In moving images it's pretty noticeable.

I was curious about the noise reduction in there camera, I gave the shot below the same treatment but set the noise reduction to 0 instead of -5. Just makes it look more like the GH2, blotchy. I prefer the fine noise with noise reduction at -5. Setting it to +5 makes things a lot worse.

[url="http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/125-gh3-gain-noise-reduction-0-in-camera-min-5-max-5/"][img]http://www.eoshd.com/comments/uploads/gallery/album_16/gallery_20742_16_896320.png[/img][/url]


[quote name='kirk' timestamp='1350745964' post='20045']
Nostalgic is a quite noisy profile for dark subjects... try Vibrant and see the difference...
[/quote]

Vibrant, really? I thought Smooth/Nostalgic were the best modes to get the most out of the GH2 (dynamic range etc).

I took the screen grabs from moving images (I was focusing back and forth slowly) so the depth of field could be a bit different. The f-stop didn't go any lower since I was using a manual lens. With sharpness at 0 I think the image is pretty good, same as the GH2 without sharpening artefacts.

Here's a window/shadow test.

GH3 on top.
Camera's at iso 200, WB 7000K, 12-35mm @ f/11, 1/50s
Same picture profiles as above, but kept sharpening at 0 for the GH3.

Straight out of camera:

[url="http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/124-gh3-no-gain/"][img]http://www.eoshd.com/comments/uploads/gallery/album_16/gallery_20742_16_2368934.png[/img][/url]
[url="http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/122-gh2-no-gain/"][img]http://www.eoshd.com/comments/uploads/gallery/album_16/gallery_20742_16_721524.png[/img][/url]

Moved gain to 0.25 in DaVinci Resolve:

[url="http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/123-gh3-gain/"][img]http://www.eoshd.com/comments/uploads/gallery/album_16/gallery_20742_16_3405851.png[/img][/url]
[url="http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/121-gh2-gain/"][img]http://www.eoshd.com/comments/uploads/gallery/album_16/gallery_20742_16_1088366.png[/img][/url]

This is where the GH3 starts to shine, although I'm curious how a hacked GH2 bit bitrate similar to the GH3 would hold up.

This GH2 footage was around 20Mbit. The GH3 is 72Mbit All-i (thats what i'm shooting in all the time btw).

Just received my Iscomorphot 8/2x. What a difference with my Isco Optic Ultra Star.. wow!

[URL=http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/120-p1020890/][IMG]http://www.eoshd.com/comments/uploads/gallery/album_17/gallery_20742_17_32510.jpg[/IMG][/URL]

Lovely images, would like to see that!

[quote name='galenb' timestamp='1350695592' post='20017']Can you do one of those famous depth of field shots where you take a picture of a ruler or measuring tape extending out from the camera? That way, at least something along the ruler should be in focus. Oh and could you stop down the lens a bit too?
[/quote]
Here are some comparisons (crops from video)
Dialling down the sharpness on the GH3 to -5 has a pretty big effect. More so than -2 on the GH2 it seems.

[URL=http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/117-sharpness-moire/][IMG]http://www.eoshd.com/comments/uploads/gallery/album_16/gallery_20742_16_192245.png[/IMG][/URL]

Also interesting is that the GH3 image looks flatter, but still the GH2 shows more detail in de shadows on the right. Maybe the curve is different. Looks like the GH2 has darker midtones. Here is the whole frame with settings:

[URL=http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/116-setup-contrast/][IMG]http://www.eoshd.com/comments/uploads/gallery/album_16/gallery_20742_16_697039.png[/IMG][/URL]

And what are we doing here on EOSHD exactly? 95% of the time is spend talking about gear, raw, 4k, whatever. The Screening Room isn't really the most active part of the forum. Anything wrong with that? No. Most of us are guys, there's a bit of a technology freak in everyone of us. I'm not saying people here don't shoot stuff. But while we dream about the BMC and a Sony NEX-hack the girls are probably off shooting something, cause they don't have a clue about raw or whatever and they actually don't give a f*ck.

Anyway, it's good for the economy ;) let people drool over gear, buy it, sell it and move onto the next camera they rarely use. I have a lot of stuff that I rarely use, and I do enjoy collecting, buying and selling it, so yes, it's a hobby.

I don't see why this 'trend' would ever change. Technology will always be advancing. There will always be something new, something better, something bigger... And there will be people buying it just for the sake of that. If they are happy with it, what is the problem?

ISO 200, 1/50s, Konica Hexar 40mm @ f/2.8, WB 3600K
GH2: Nostalgic -2-2-2-2
GH3: Natural -5-5-5-5

Be sure to click for full size.

[url="http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/114-panasonic-gh2-moire/"][img]http://www.eoshd.com/comments/uploads/gallery/album_16/gallery_20742_16_2130456.png[/img][/url]
[url="http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/115-panasonic-gh3-moire/"][img]http://www.eoshd.com/comments/uploads/gallery/album_16/gallery_20742_16_1746706.png[/img][/url]

.....

I'm sure you can guess which is which camera.

[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]

It's called a hobby ;)

The shadow detail test is a nice idea, I expect it to be better at that than the GH2, also because of the higher bitrate it should have more headroom for grading. I'll put some shots trough Resolve Lite. Don't expect the results too soon, i'm going to do some shooting and then put everything together. Thanks for the ideas!

Why 1/40? Isn't that supposed to be 1/50?

Forget about 'log', everything set to -5 doesn't make it flatter than GH2. I have to check if it changes at all, could be a firmware thing. When starting to record the picture changes quite a lot, just like the GH2.

I have old glass. Minolta MC, C-mount, Hexar 40mm f/1.8, etc. Was planning on using that. Just found out I lost (??) my Minolta 58mm f/1.4 and 28mm f/2.8 adapter and ND-filter... :( Aargh.

Anyway, I'm making a 'rig' with the GH3 + Hexar 40mm f/1.8 and GH2 + Minolta 45mm f/2, the narrower fov on the GH3 is quite noticable, because it lacks the multi-aspect sensor, so this should give about the same fov.

FFS.. both my minolta adapters are MIA :(

Thanks for the suggestions. The picture profiles are making things a bit complicated. They have completely different names. The GH3 doesn't have smooth/nature or cinema, it has 'Natural' though and you can adjust every seting - or + 5. Still, with contrast to -5 it looks more contrasty than Smooth with everything on -2 on the GH2.

I have a GH3 (body firmware 0.5) and a GH2 (unhacked, it's on loan from Panasonic) right here now. I'm going to shoot some comparisons. Any requests? I'll see what I can do.

Nice idea. I'll give it a shot!

I'd prefer the focus of the collaboration to be on creativity. It's impossible to really compare the different anamorphics anyway since everybody is in a different place, using a different camera, different taking lens.. etc.

Can we edit shots into a clip of max. one minute, or should it be single clips?

What is your plan for the final result? Vimeo/Youtube?

[quote name='nigelbb' timestamp='1350550412' post='19888']
???? An extra couple of stops of usable exposure counts as no improvement? The only full frame sensor that doesn't exhibit moire or aliasing counts as no improvement? The 5D3 is a roaring success particularly among its target market of professional & serious amateur photographers.
[/quote]
I'm talking about raw sensor performance, not video. The video of most dslr's isn't very representative of what the sensor is capable of.

The 5D Mark III is a fine camera. But in raw sensor performace it is'nt a leap ahead of the 5D Mark II. The D800 (sony sensor) has considerably better dynamic range in the lower iso values. To me that's a major improvement.

The fact that the 650D scores lower than the 600D and the likes could be because of the hybrid focus. There are AF pixels on the image sensor so maybe that affects the image somehow m

Anyway, I think Canon jumping on the Sony wagon wouldn't be good for the competition in the market. That would practically make every camera have a Sony sensor.

Canon does need new sensor technology. They have been recycling their offerings for ages. I'm especially disappointed by the 5D Mark 3, a completely new sensor, but no mayor improvements and Sony clearly has the lead if you're looking at the numbers.

Canon will come with new sensors though. Probably the 650D is the last camera with the 18mp sensor. In 2013 were going to see something new. It better be good.. I'm sure it will have more megapixels, but Canon needs to make big steps in other departments as well.

It's a changing market though. It's possible that Canons new generation sensor rocks and will beat the current Sony offerings. Although the 5D3 (and even the 1DX) aren't a good sign. It would be surprising if the new apsc-sensor has much better dynamic range than their top models. I hope it does and I hope that will speed up Sony's development as well...

OM-D better than the RX1 in raw picture quality is very unlikely though. The RX1 will beat the OM-D hands down in DXOMark, see the Nikon D600 results, same sensor pretty much.

Kinda funny to hear so much talk about skintone while watching yellow people.

I'm pretty sure the BMD will hold up fine. If it shoots raw the tone is all about what you do with it in post. Isn't it?

Yeah I heard so! I already saw your video when looking into it. Can't wait to try it out :)
I have a very small 50mm f/2 L39 Jupiter lens and also a Helios 44.

How do you fix it to your taking lens? I'm looking into a clamp solution.

I don't see much reason to hate it :)
Which Iscomorphit is it? 8/1,5x or 8/2x?

I'm waiting for my 8/2x to arrive. My first reasonably small anamorphic.. Curious how it will work out.

[quote name='EOSHD' timestamp='1350463245' post='19842']
By the way the aspect ratio on this project is an experimental one, it isn't technically correct nor is it meant to be... Rather an intentional creative decision to have a slightly stretched image. I'll write more about this once the music video is done.
[/quote]

I was afraid that would be the case ;) Personally it quite bothers me to watch something with and incorrect aspect ratio, like 4:3 stretched to 16:9... Anyway, I'm curious to see the result.