Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'Artifacts'.
Found 1 result
Good Day! I'm new to the site and new to video work, but I've been lurking around the forums and Review Articles for a while now, trying to figure out what camera I should pick. While totally new to serious videography, I've been doing photography and very light video on the side for about 6 years, so I wouldn't say I'm blind to the more enthusiast thresholds of acceptable quality. With that in mind, I've narrowed it down to two models. Well... one. Two. Maybe just one. Possibly two. GX7. Or GH3. Currently I'm heavily leaning towards the GX7 as: - I assume focus peaking for someone that isn't trained in the art of manual focusing would be nothing short of magical(?). - I will not be needing high quality external audio (for the foreseeable future) (I'll probably mostly be doing artsy montages with music on top,heh...). But I've seen the GH3 recommended over the GX7 for video quite a few times because of: - Bitrate - Codec I have read Mr. Reid's (predominantly positive) thoughts on the GX7 and that strongly weighed into me currently leaning towards it. My question is: Has anyone who has tried both the GX7 and a more codec-competent (higher bitrate) solution ever been strongly frustrated with the former at any point? Like going "THAT WAS THE PERFECT SHOT! GOD HIMSELF PARTED THE SKIES AND UNLEASHED THE MOST HEAVENLY RAYS OF LIGHT THAT DUCK HAS EVER SEEN. YOU HAD - ONE JOB! " when you came home to realize that the water ripples in your perfect shot created the occasional blocky codec artifact? I guess my question can mostly be boiled down to "Bitrate Vs. Focus Peaking". I hope it isn't overly redundant. Any advice and personal input would be really really appreciated. Like... ...this much > [ ]