jnorman34

Just installed it today. Wasn't having any probs before so I don't expect to see any differences.

i am using a manfrotto 500AH fluid head. i often using the rubber band trick to help get my pans smooth. however, it is quite hard to do a very slow pan and make it very smooth. i have read about the bescor motorized pan/tilt head, and varying comments that say it will go very slow and others that complain it is still too fast. what gear or technique do you guys recommend to achieve very slow, smooth pans? thanks.

Compiling a short documentary of architectural subject matter. most of it has been shot in 4K with the GH4, but I want to use a couple of short clips that were shot in 1080p with a D5300. is there any problem in upscaling the 1080 footage when I render the video to a 4k output? anything special I should do, or watch out for in the process? thanks.

Glenn - very nice work. Thanks.

hmmm - I just watched some footage from the bescor unit, and it hardly seems any smoother than my hand pans. perhaps I should go back to the old rubber band method... are there any other good tricks to get smooth pans?

Can someone suggest a decent affordable motorized pan head? I have seen the polaroid one for about $100, but its reviews are not so glowing. the bescor unit for $125 gets better reviews. I am mainly doing pans of architectural subjects, so I want a fairly slow pan, so a unit that has adjustable pan speed would be good. I have a nice manfrotto fluid head, but my hand-moved pans are not as smooth or consistent as I want. also, do any of you use your fluid head on top of the motorized head, or does the motorized head take the place of the fluid head entirely? thanks.

well, I know I personally picked up several good new ideas from this. thanks, jcs.

Thanks Julian . Yes, I had the camera in movie mode...

the manual seems a bit confusing on this topic. I want to shoot a couple of timelapse clips with the GH4. the manual says to put the shutter mode dial on the timelapse setting, and then press MENU/SET, which then should bring up the timelapse settings box. then it says to press the MENU button again. but when I press MENU, it just displays the normal menu. and if I press MENU again, it just turns off the menu. the manual also says something like, "if you touch the (whatever) button, the timelapse settings dialog box will be displayed. I cannot seem to find any (whatever) button. can someone please walk me through the process to do a timelapse sequence? I want to shoot one frame per second for 300 seconds. thanks.

hi tim - I am using a manfrotto MVH500AH on manfrotto 055xprob tripod, and an opteka 24" slider. the slider is mounted on the tripod, and the head is mounted on the slider.

Michael - you funny ;-)

thanks for the kind words. I used the panny 7-14mm, and there is some noticeable flare in some shots. regular UHD at 30fps, cinelike-D, no other adjustments - pretty much straight out of camera. aperture priority at f8 - I should have opened up some for some of the interior shots, but live and learn... I gotta find some better background music - any suggestions? post processing done with powerdirector ultra 12 on a Lenovo yoga 2 pro, i7, 8 ram, intel graphics 4400 - it rendered in about 30 minutes with no glitches. a couple of the zooms were done in post - I need to learn to use keyframes (duh).

Wow - I just posted my first 4k video on youtube from the GH4. Even viewed in 1080, it is just amazingly sharp. at 4k, it hurts your eyes...

I have a new GH4 that I am using for architectural video work. I am using a panny 7-14mm, but it is quite prone to flare. I looked at the oly 9-18mm for MFT, but it feels too small and plasticky for me. the B&H guy says the original Oly 9-18mm 4/3 lens is not compatible with the GH4. I cannot find any other alternatives. what would you suggest? I want to maintain AF and autoexposure - otherwise I would have used metabones and Nikon 12-24mm. thanks.

thanks jon - the first few GH4 4k pieces seem very detailed (3200x1800 monitor), yet with a nice warm finish (cinelike-D profile, no other adjustments). straight 1080/30p(both 100mbps and 50 mbps) footage from the GH4 is also rendering very well.

I have purchased a new GH4 to do my documentary video work. I fretted quite a bit over having to also purchase a new computer which could handle editing and rendering 4k video files, and read as many reviews, etc, as I could regarding what kind of computer would be required. Most of what I read indicated that a 2.4 ghz quad core i7, with 16ram, and high-end dedicated graphics card, was about the minimum. I needed a smallish laptop that could do the job, so I searched gaming computers like the razer blade, sager, alienware, etc. most which had the above specs were quite expensive, had 15.6" or 17" screens, were heavy, and I really didn't like my choices much. I wanted a nice lightweight ultrabook type machine. I looked at the 13" MBP with intel iris graphics, asus zenbook, sony z-series and Lenovo thinkpads and yogas, and others, but nothing small seemed to have good dedicated graphics or quad core i7. I finally decided that I would just buy the computer I wanted, and if it wouldn't handle 4k, I would just keep shooting in 1080 for now and wait. maybe shoot a few things in 4k for archiving. So, I went out and bought a Lenovo yoga 2 pro, core i7 4500U, 8 ram, intel graphics 4400, QHD display. guess what? I imported some 4k clips into power director 12, did a small amount of editing, adding some audio and titles, and hit the render button to output a 4k file - it worked just fine - rendered quite quickly and smoothly, no stress on the machine, no excessive heat, nada - no problems. Now, I don't think this machine would be the best solution for those who need to do long videos with lots of corrections and grading, but for those of us who generally work with minor editing and output shorter-than-feature-film videos, it does not appear that it actually requires a $2500+ computer to do it. just thought a few of you might want to know that.

Thanks to you all for the excellent responses and information. As you can surely tell, I am still learning video (I spent my career shooting architecture with a 4x5), and this forum has been most helpful and friendly.

Thanks for the responses. My budget is fairly flexible. If it requires a $5000 camcorder to match the sharpness of a GH3, i just want to understand what exactly I should be shopping for (3-chip, single large sensor, etc), and why so many pros find the advantages of camcorders outweigh the better IQ of the much less expensive DSLRs. As far as 4k, i initially thought it would be ideal, but having carefully examined some truly pro-quality 1080 footage I am not really convinced it is worth the cost of a whole new spendy computer system and other attendant time and money investments to go to 4k right now. I would like to hear your opinion on that aspect as well.

If my main goal is the achieve the sharpest possible image quality (shooting architecture archival footage), what would be the best choice of camera - a DSLR (GH3, A7s, etc) or a semi-pro camcorder (XA20, sony nx30, etc)? ie, will $1500-2000 camcorders with smallish sensors be able to give me as sharp an image as a GH3? or will one of the new 4K cams be a better way to go than any FHD camera? if 4K is the best path, is a DSLR like the GH4 the best tool, or am I better off with a camcorder form factor like the sony AX100? believe it or not, the library archivist does not know what he wants, and is leaving it up to me to make the choice of format and equipment. he says he will be perfectly happy if I choose to go with FHD instead of 4K. I currently have a GH4 on preorder, but can still change my mind. I never use shallow depth of field, because I normally want everything in focus. I generally use very wide angle lenses (I have been using a 12-24mm on a Nikon D5300). generally everything is done on big tripod, with some car-mounted footage, and occasional steadycam type footage. I am not trying to get a "cinema" look. with a DSLR, I can easily get adequate wide angle lenses, whereas with most semi-pro camcorders, I would have to add a WA adapter, which scares me some. however, there are several benefits to the camcorders, such as slow power zoom capability, better built in audio capability, and, with the new cams like the sony NX30 with the balanced optical steadyshot, I could avoid having to fight the stupid fiddly steadycam gizmo I have... any thoughts or recommendations are appreciated.

OP here. I wound up buying a24" opteka slider, and I love it. Works great and has added another needed dimension to my work.

jon - I generally use aperture priority, with f8 as primary setting, and let the shutter go wherever it needs to - I don't often have issues with odd looking rolling wheels, etc. but I do have a clamp on filter holder that I used to use with my 4x5 for times when I want slower shutter for water shots, etc. I have a little audio technical Pro24 on-cam mic I use for ambient pickup. ambient audio is included with all vetted archival footage submitted, but is only rarely included in the "overview" videos (selected short clips). I typically do several minutes of footage on a given subject for the archival video, and then take little pieces of several subjects and compile them for the overview videos - for the overviews, I just drop in some canned background music and will include some pertinent ambient audio if it is important - such as the steam whistle sound of a paddle wheeler as it passes under a bridge - so the reviewer will know there is some live audio they may want to include in their use. here is one of the little overview videos:

thanks ash - almost none of the footage is indoors, but almost all of it is WA. The sony a7s will not do 4k internally, and I actually prefer the longer depth of field available from smaller sensors - I never use shallow depth of field shots. sony makes a WA adapter fro the ax100 for about $280, but I have seen no tests of it. someone did post a test of the raynox adapter on the ax100, and it was simply not sharp enough. I plan on using a 7-14mm on the GH4 if I go that way.

I am doing straightforward documentary footage of architectural subject matter. I have been using a D5300, and have a GH4 on preorder. But I am wondering If a sony AX100 might be a better choice for what I am doing. I am not trying to shoot "cinema". I want sharp. I have mainly been a still shooter, and am relatively new to video. I have viewed as many video samples and comparisons as I can find, and as usual opinions are all over the places. Footage from both gh4 and ax100 all looks good to me. It really comes down to ease of post processing and ease of use in the field. The ax100 camcorder factor has benefits and convenient power zoom, and much better internal mics for general ambient pickup. It comes with adequate editing software for the sony 4k files, and doesn't require speed class 3 cards. The main problem I see with the sony is no good wide angle solution. Much of my current work is done at 18mm equivalent FL. The gh4 has good wide angle lenses available. However, I will need spendy new memory cards, new software, and very likely a whole new very expensive computer to handle the files. While I like the gh4, if I could find a good wide angle solution for the ax100, I would probably go with the camcorder form factor. Any thoughts, suggestions, etc would be much appreciated.

to isolate vocals, you will probably need a hypercardioid or short shotgun. Neumann KM185, AKG C483, AT4053, Sennheiser MKE 300/400/600.

The D5300 shoots quite good video, with generally no observable aliasing or moire, unlike literally every other canon and Nikon body I tried out.