Inazuma

I hear what you guys are saying, but sharpness differences from lenses should not be that significant on a 1080p image. Nevertheless I just did another little test: '> This time the Sony is using a Konica Hexanon 40mm f1.8 and DRO level 3. GX7 iDynamic Standard. As you see from the picture, I had to underexpose by a stop to stop the highlights from clipping. But beyond that, there is a lot of fine detail around the tree and the fence that the Sony hasn't captured. And for those doubting the sharpness of the Hexanon against the Panny: '> Anyway, off to work now :) I will do another testing session tonight if you guys have any ideas.

I've tried that with d5200 footage and this a6000 footage and it always ends up with that digitally sharpened video look. It doesn't bring out details. I'd rather leave it looking soft as there's a film-like quality to that. Maybe I have bad technique though. Can anyone recommend effect settings for PPro or After Effects? With the GX7 I used the Panny 12-35mm f2.8. With the a6000 I used the kit lens for the day light shot and the 16mm f2.8 for the night shot. I know what you're thinking, so I'll retest with the 16mm in daylight later.

Hope this helps: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1094036/a6000/a6000_iso640.MTS https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1094036/a6000/gx7_iso640.MTS

Well guys, I have been testing the camera for a couple of hours now and here is what I have found so far: RAW Photo: Brightening the shadows from high ISO (~3200) files produces purple colouring similar to the Nikon D5200. The GX7 does not do this (see figure 1). The a6000 does clip less at the very extreme of highlights. Not near enough to make a difference to photographers though. Colour depth may be slightly better on a6000. I'm not sure how to test this exactly. Video: At the same exposure and similar contrast settings, the a6000 is more prone to blowing out highlights than the GX7. There is noticeably less picture detail. But also more aliasing and moire than on the GX7 (see figure 2). The noise is quite nice. On the GX7, noise is very dancy and distracting. On the a6000, noise seems more calm; less sharp; less chroma. Some may even say film grainish. The trade-off however is that there is less detail. (see figure 3) The colour might be more accurate in low light on the a6000. I need to do a bit more testing. On the flip side, the GX7's video is so sharp that the codec has trouble fitting it all into a 24mbit/s file and I often see artefacts when viewing at 100%. Handling: The EVF is miles better than the NEX 6 and GX7. There is no rainbow tearing and the refresh rate is fast. Everything is clear. Usable in low light too. Even the eyecup is better. The menu system is miles better than the NEX6. On the whole, I still find the GX7 to be more usable due to the AF/MF switch, front/rear dials and touch screen. Strangely, the focus peaking becomes less intense whilst shooting video. The AF is indeed very good. It can focus in even less light than my GX7 (which has incredible low light AF ability). The AF tracking is good too but not great. I'm not sure if it could actually handle a cyclist riding towards you. I've tested with both the kit lens and the 16mm f2.8. The latter doesn't have Phase Detection, but the contrast system works just as well. When you manually focus, a distance scale comes up on the screen, which is very nice. I don't think the NEX 6 had this feature. Only problem is it doesn't work whilst filming. Samples below all shot at 25p @ 24mb/s. Dynamic range settings were tweaked to bring the images closer together. Noise reduction turned off (although honestly there isnt any difference that I can see when turning it on on the GX7). Figure 1: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1094036/a6000/raw_shadow_adjustment.JPG a6000 left, GX7 right. f3.5, 1/50th, ISO 3200. Lightroom Shadows +100 Figure 2: '> a6000 top, GX7 bottom. f5.6, 1/50th, ISO 400 Figure 3: '> a6000 top, GX7 bottom. f3.5, 1/50th, ISO 3200, WB 5500k. Overall I'm thinking I'll probably send the a6000 back. There is not enough improvement to justify me swapping systems.

People have been saying similar things in the GH4 threads. You really have to look at the context of the video, because at the end of the day, video that isnt made to look cinematic will indeed just look like video. The sensor is only part of what makes an image. For example, in the Gordon Liang video, the weather is overcast with neutral colours, he's using the kit lens and Program priority (meaning it may not even be the right shutter speed). And to top it off, he's shooting at 50 fps. It's just going to look like video no matter what.

I've just ordered an A6000, which should arrive tomorrow. I'm going to pit it against my current GX7. Do any of you guys want to know anything? I will be testing it for a couple days; after which I will decide which one to keep. BTW the main reasons I've bought it to possibly replace the GX7 are as follows: Optically stabalised 50mm and 75mm equivalent lenses. Purportedly good video quality. More range in the RAW files. If I ever need to, I can build up the system with monitors or recorders using the HDMI slot. Possibility of using Canon EF lenses with electronic control. Though for the foreseeable future I won't need this. Region switchable. The fast and accurate autofocus means that when I'm run and gunning, I won't need to manually focus, which tends to mean knocking the camera about and disturbing the video. The better grip and overall nicer finish. My reservations about replacing the GX7 are currently as follows: I absolutely love the Oly 17mm because of its manual feel in use. And the equivalent focal length on the Sony E system is twice the price of it. The Panasonic menu system is the best I've ever used (and I've used pretty much all the systems). The silent mode is very handy. The exposure and whitebalance metering are also the best I've ever used. The control over dynamic range in videos/JPG you have with the GX7 is amazing.

Ahh! I have been doing a similar thing - gathering clips over a period of time from various places to eventually put into one video piece. Yours has turned out fantastically well though :D God, I'm jealous. And also inspired. Well done again! May I ask what lenses you've been using and if you used any kind of chest rig or anything like that for the "handheld" shots?

The way the GH4 renders at ISO3200+ is very similar to my GX7. Nice fine grain but lacking in colour and DR. Not bad though.

Hey guys So after coming home from Berlin and checking out my videos, I realised there were splodges of purple all over the image. It is more noticeable in Ex-Tele mode, such as in the video below. I've tried using an air blower and using the software sensor cleaning and pixel refresh, but nothing has worked. When I shine a light over the sensor I can definitely see some particles on top. How can I get rid of them?

Just so you know, I have found the audio on the GX7 to be very good. I used it at band practice one time; put it about 2 feet behind the drummer and there was absolutely no cracking, popping or anything. It was just clean audio with decent bass. Set automatically and all (I dont even know how to control the audio). The video performance is very good indeed. More detailed than the NEX-6 and D5200 I had before it. And much better control over shadows and highlights.The only drawback for me is that I can clearly see compression artefacts on things like grass at 100%. I wish there was clean HDMI out. I have heard that the image quality from cheaper focal reducers aren't too far away from Metabones'. However the Metabones Nikon G adapter has an aperture ring built in whilst the cheaper ones don't. The slightly higher crop factor of the G6 to the GH2 is negligible really. But I do know what you mean. If you're a background blur guy (like I am), the crop factor thing is always at the back of my mind. The focal reducers have only heightened the issue too because with Sony E cameras you an enable the IS and aperture control for Canon lenses. And also you can get to full-frame DOF whereas M43 will only go up to APS-C.

How is autofocus with Metabones Canon EF adapters? Also can you change the tint of the whitebalance settings like you can with the new Panasonic cameras?

Very nice :) I'll be in Berlin from Thursday to Sunday with my GX7. Going to see if I can get to that park; looks like a great spot!

This lens has the longest focus throw of any I've used. Its very frustrating

Does anyone have any (cheap) suggestions for achieving focus adjustments whilst using a handheld steadicam? I was thinking about putting the camera on rails, attaching a follow focus and using a whip. To me this sounds like a reasonable idea because when you turn the whip, there shouldn't be any change in pressure that would unbalance the steadicam. But maybe I'm just dumb. Thoughts?

As usual Andrew, your "test" shows not only the camera's capabilities but your great ability/creativity. Well done :)

It looks digital because it's so sharp and it's shot on a standard picture profile. Im sure once people start shooting in cinestyle and do grading, the footage will look more pleasant.

Hey, you use the Gorillapod as a chest stabalizer too :D There was me thinking I was some sort of genius for thinking that up

A lot of blown-out signs there. I wonder what it would take for them not to be blown out? Is it a sensor size issue? Lack of DR? What is it exactly? What cameras can prevent this?

What's your opinion on how these three cameras compare? :)

The Panasonics are anything but washed out. Just look at this scene I shot a couple months ago @etidona Are you absolutely sure the lighting and camera settings were the same? Because the light in the Panasonic test is not only more white, but also looks 1 or 2 stops brighter :/

This camera is becoming of great interest to me. The E system has a 16-70 (equiv 24-105) f4 zoom, stabilized 35mm and 50mm primes. And now finally the camera has a proper menu system, clean HDMI and region switchability. It would be great to know how the video compares to the Nikon d5200/d5300 and Panasonic cameras for detail, dynamic range and noise :D

As a previous owner of a Nikon d5200, I have to say that the colours generally had a greenish tint to them. In Lightroom i would often have moved the tint slider to the right (magenta). So it's nothing that post can't change. As for the 70d - I cant comment much. I previously owned a 550d. I've recently looked back at the footage I took with it and have been appalled. The image was soft, there was very noticeable moire/aliasing, and the noise was large and blotchy. From what I've heard, all Canon APS-C cameras give similar quality. I would not recommend a Nikon d5200/d5300 either because of the lack of focus aids (like peaking) and quirks to do with its handling. I would like to recommend my Panasonic GX7 but I take issue with the price of the lenses and the lack of optically stabilised primes. Other than that, I love the camera. It has the largest feature set and best interface of all the cameras I've used (including those two above, plus a NEX-6). The stills image quality is somewhere between Canon APS-C and Nikon APS-C (probably leaning more towards the Nikon). The video quality is certainly sharper and you have better control over the dynamic range, however it is slightly noisier than the Nikon. Another plus is that almost all the lenses are silent and focus very quickly. Not as quick as the 70d or new Sony a6000, but still fast.

Please note my phrasing, "processed film." As in they (most likely) will have treated the film in a way to achieve the look they wanted. And the last thing you said is really adding to what I'm saying, which is that the camera is only a piece of the puzzle in making a nice looking film.

You're comparing a very neutral (possibly out of camera) video to processed film. Of course the film will look more cinematic! The GH3 has already proven to have more or less the same DR as 5D3's video (non-ML) (EG:

Few more tests posted recently: