Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Andrew Reid

5D Mark III raw versus Panasonic GH4

Recommended Posts



Dilemma of the century. Do you take the advantages of raw or 4K? Do you take the full frame sensor or the crop? Do you take the DSLR form factor or the advantages for video of mirrorless?

This is something I've been really trying to draw a conclusion on in recent weeks for my own sanity!

Read the full article here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
EOSHD Pro Color for Sony cameras EOSHD Pro LOG for Sony CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs

that speed booster is doing wonderful things.  Nice to see the gh4 being exposed and treated properly.  the dr looks great.    

 

 

I'd love to see a follow up test with a human subject in medium and close shots with the lenses at f2.8 - f5.6.  - the type of aperture at 50mm that works well for slight human movement in frame while maintaining complete facial focus but with good defocus on show.  These type of shots will highlight the differences (if there are any to be seen) between a bigger sensor or smaller one.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great comparison video Andrew. The 5d3 and GH4 match surprisingly closely. I didn't expect the GH4 to keep up in dynamic range. (Question: did the 5d3 have additional range that you clipped to get the shots to match?)

 

The GH4 has a nice advantage in that 4k gives you reframing options, and with the compact and easy-to-manage 100Mb codec being used on the GH4, the camera seems like a real production workhorse.

 

Based on this, I'm guessing that the GH4 matches pretty closely to the BMCC. Anyone seem comparison footage yet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GH4 sharpness kills it!! But like the colours of 5dMk3!

 

Great post Andrew thank you for that.

 

As the ex owner of GH3 i know what u saying about ergonomics and handling, but after going on canon 5dmk3 with some L lenses i was experiencing whole new universe of full frame and 14bit raw although post-process (editing - space on HHDs and few  kpb CF cards- and new computer suited for workflow) i also know what u saying about menage the RAW files.. so very good article !!!

 

kinda wants me to grab one GH4 and have both worlds! :D

 

Cheers and Peace 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GH4 and MFT BMCC with Speedboosters for me. Full frame is a great look but that's all it is, a look. It seems to be treated as some form of mystic nirvana and is regularly abused.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If one had to make a film out of that footage I would pick the GH4.  Beautiful crispness!  However, I don't feel any of that footage showed the low-contrast look possible with the 5D3 RAW, and not the GH4.   In the scenes where there was wide dynamic range, like when you shot under the arches, or into shadows, it seemed both cameras were similar.  The GH4 did look more contrasty, but not by much. 

 

I believe, if you shot indoors the difference between the cameras would be more pronounced.  Outside, the un-modified brightness just overwhelms both cameras.

 

Thoughts, Andrew?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

No mention of low light? Big win for the 5D.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the good fortune of having shot Leica and Leicaflex, so my 35mm Summilux M is similar to the 50mm work with.

I am going to get the Kiron tilt-shift Leica R adapter to use with a 21mm Liecaflex S.A. I suspect your existing lenses will lead most users to their choice of bodies.

I have a pair of GH2s and I still can shoot excellent 1080P. I do wish there was an acive Cannon mt Metabones adapter so I could effectively shoot my 17-40mm f:4 L on the GH series cameras.

If you spend the same amount you get the GH4 expansion foot, and that opens a whole new can of worms or maybe caviar?

You chose a pair of cameras which will give professional video, so it's bells & whistles, Lenses, and features. There is no wrong choice.

Every time Video looks static I now realize it is me, not the gear.

What a feast of goodies!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny how *sharpness* elicits oohs and aahs from certain people who then put 40 or 50 year old (sometimes uncoated) lenses on these cameras. 

 

Nobody wants to see ultra sharp footage of people's faces, especially when the skin tones are produced by a GH series camera. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the neumanfilms comparison the Epic and 5d3 looked out of focus.  He says in the comments he was focused as good as possible, but he doesn't say on what object so I don't believe they were.  So that particular video is useless as far as a comparison.

 

As for Andrew's, the shots really do match together quite well. Obviously more detail in the GH4 so I think it would be superior for documentaries.  There are a few shots where the 5d3 seemed to have a little bit more dynamic range, but not by much at all.  I guess the best person to make the comparison is the person grading the footage.  Which camera can get to the image you want the easiest and most reliably, that is the only way do decide because in this test the images are equal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right on cue the BMC Users are declaring GH4 as "horrible" and "atrocious". I feel like a peace keeper because i love both!

 

I stay off that forum, it's a total abject waste of my time to be involved in defending cameras. Defend a country! Defend a person. But not a bloody camera :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the neumanfilms comparison the Epic and 5d3 looked out of focus.  He says in the comments he was focused as good as possible, but he doesn't say on what object so I don't believe they were.  So that particular video is useless as far as a comparison.

 

As for Andrew's, the shots really do match together quite well. Obviously more detail in the GH4 so I think it would be superior for documentaries.  There are a few shots where the 5d3 seemed to have a little bit more dynamic range, but not by much at all.  I guess the best person to make the comparison is the person grading the footage.  Which camera can get to the image you want the easiest and most reliably, that is the only way do decide because in this test the images are equal.

 

It was a good test in my opinion. It clearly shows that the Epic has a stronger OLPF and a softer result ungraded. Ungraded raw is very different to GH4 4K where a certain level of sharpening is already applied in-camera even with sharpness all the way down at -5.

 

Yes the Epic looks surprisingly soft, almost as soft as upscaled 1080p from the 5D Mark III raw footage.

 

But with a little sharpening in post it would have been much closer.

 

Am I the only one surprised at how well the 5D Mark III blow-ups look under the microscope at 4K? I expected there to be a bigger difference. My opinion is that in terms purely of detail, 4K vs 1080p depends on how you're going to present / show the end footage to the audience and even on the eyesight of the audience, but clearly taking a full pixel readout of the sensor in the GH4 for 4K has resulted in overall image quality leaping forwards, not just in terms of resolution. Said this all along.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny how certain people elicit oohs and aahs about sharpness and then put 40 or 50 year old (sometimes uncoated) lenses on these cameras. 

 

Nobody wants to see ultra sharp footage of people's faces, especially when the skin tones are produced by a GH series camera. 

 

There's nothing wrong with the skin tones on the GH4 at all. They benefit from 10bit luma at 2K for a start. 10bit everything at 4K if you are going to use a Shogun. The colour reproduction is good and skin tones grade well especially with a boost to the red channel in post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What do you think of this gh4 versus a blackmagic pocket? 

I have the impression that blackmagic has a more cinematic look but maybe it's something you can have in post with the gh4 or it's always have a more "video" look more suitable for documentaries than fiction?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If one had to make a film out of that footage I would pick the GH4.  Beautiful crispness!  However, I don't feel any of that footage showed the low-contrast look possible with the 5D3 RAW, and not the GH4.   In the scenes where there was wide dynamic range, like when you shot under the arches, or into shadows, it seemed both cameras were similar.  The GH4 did look more contrasty, but not by much. 

 

I believe, if you shot indoors the difference between the cameras would be more pronounced.  Outside, the un-modified brightness just overwhelms both cameras.

 

Thoughts, Andrew?

 

A low contrast look is not superior. You can make the GH4 and 5D raw look as flat as a pancake if you want to. Question is what is the benefit? If your monitor had a low contrast look you'd return it to the shop! I don't know why people think a flat look is superior. For grading raw has no look. It isn't flat. It is raw data straight off the sensor that describes colours, whites and blacks. Why compress all that into the mids and get grey? I blame stuff like CineStyle for the confusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What do you think of this gh4 versus a blackmagic pocket? 

I have the impression that blackmagic has a more cinematic look but maybe it's something you can have in post with the gh4 or it's always have a more "video" look more suitable for documentaries than fiction?

 

The Blackmagic is practically designed from the ground up to deliver a cinematic look out of the box, whereas with the GH4 it is more at the discretion of the user. If you mishandle it, then it is easy to end up with an image which is too sharp, too flat and too lacking in character. If handled correctly the GH4 is as cinematic as just about anything else out there if not more so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Blackmagic is practically designed from the ground up to deliver a cinematic look out of the box, whereas with the GH4 it is more at the discretion of the user. If you mishandle it, then it is easy to end up with an image which is too sharp, too flat and too lacking in character. If handled correctly the GH4 is as cinematic as just about anything else out there if not more so.

Thanks man and for you the gh4 codec compression is as good as the proresHD?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...