GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz

David Heath · September 20th, 2012, 03:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomas Smet

Those are two totally different things. What is quoted there is the form of HDR mode Panasonic added to the GH3. It is used to create a sort of HDR photography look which is interesting if you like that sort of thing. Dynamic range is totally different.

That they are two different things is exactly the point. HDR means "High Dynamic Range" and is a mode by which two images of different exposures are combined together to form a composite - it can work well, but only for still photographs. But it does have the effect of giving an end result with far higher dynamic range - the longer exposure gives the dtail in the shadows, the shorter the detail in the highlights.

You may understand the difference - but others don't. The point that HDR is a means of getting far greater dynamic range for some STILL photos is being missed. It's being seen that the GH3 has a super high dynamic range mode - and therefore must be applicable to video as well.

Is the video dynamic range better than the GH2? It may be a little - I doubt it's much.

Quote:

Also the 1080p60 I have seen from the GH3 looks more detailed then 720p. It isn't always about resolving detail. 1080p60 has more chroma resolution 960x540 instead of 640x360 and can offer a cleaner video because it doesn't have to be scaled up.

I'll give you the comment about the chroma resolution, you're quite right. As regards scaling, then no DSLR or still sensor will (currently) give true 1080 resolution off the chip. Record 1080 with such a camera and the scaling just happens in camera, not in post.

Switch a camera with 3x 1920x1080 chips from 1080 to 720 and the difference is night and day - do the same with this sort of camera and you'll find the difference far less.......

Quote:

Nothing makes compression artifacts stand out more then scaling them up. If you start at native size you never have to scale it up.

Having said that scaling up happens, it's a true point you raise that in camera scaling doesn't scale up compression artifacts. But a 1080 raster is more difficult to compress than a 720 one.......

Yes, there are likely other improvements in the coder compared to the GH2. Don't think I'm knocking the camera, just trying to get rid of unrealistic expectations.

Bill Bruner · September 20th, 2012, 01:35 PM

I have no illusions, the camera will not be perfect and already fails to live up to the initial hype (e.g., XLR accessory, 4:2:2 output from HDMI, etc.) - but I stil think it's worth $1299 and I put one on preorder because of the things I really need such as weathersealing, headphone jack, fully manual audio, and 1080/60p - but also because I'm blown away by Panasonic's decision to provide serious codec alternatives to AVCHD. This is a great decision that they're not getting enough credit for.

Yes, BMCC-like or C300-like DR would have been nice, but what Panasonic really needed was better low light performance than the unhacked GH2 - and Bruce Logan's use of practical lighting in the traffic stop scene from Genesis seems to indicate that the GH3 delivers that.

Cheers,

Bill

Jeff Harper · September 20th, 2012, 02:54 PM

Under the hood there are major improvements to this camera, as you point out Bill. I don't care how jaded a person is, one cannot imagine such a price increase would be attempted for this camera were there not plenty of reasons to justify it.

This is a major upgrade, much more significant then the GH1 to GH2. The increase in image quality may or may not be as dramatic, but in the many other improvements, yes, this is big.

There will be the usual crop of folks who initially purchase the camera who will be disappointed that it cannot capture perfect images in unreasonably dark conditions using a slow stock lens, or other similar nonsense, but I suspect this camera will make plenty of people happy.

Thomas Smet · September 20th, 2012, 03:38 PM

Upgrades are always just that, upgrades. I still stand by what I said that a lot of expectations of products today are typically unrealistic. I would love a camera to pour me a beer but I know it isn't going to happen.

We see it happen all the time with Apple products and then when people don't get an iPhone with all the hyped features they are disappointed. It really seems like more people want to judge the GH3 for what it doesn't have then for what it does have.

Jeff Harper · September 20th, 2012, 03:59 PM

I can't imagine what more anyone could want, Thomas. In my case, an HDMI output that is not cripple as it was on the GH2 would be something I would be thrilled with.

Chip Thome · September 21st, 2012, 08:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Harper

I can't imagine what more anyone could want,

All I really want to see is the colors I see with my eyes, showing up on the screen. I want those colors to pop, just like the real thing. The GH1 didn't. This GH2 doesn't either. I don't think that by the third version, getting color right is too much to ask for.

William Hohauser · September 22nd, 2012, 08:27 AM

Which cameras get the color spectrum correct, for example? And which hues does the GH2 shift?

Chip Thome · September 22nd, 2012, 10:11 AM

Hi William.... not sure about other cameras, not looking to switch systems.

But the first glaring example came when I tossed the GH2 out my front door to do some testing. There's a stop sign, relatively new stop sign, 79' away. My eyes see a bright blood red. The footage, that's a nice orangey red color. Tried 6 different modes and got six orangey red stop signs. That's when I really started looking and found my disappointment in these camera lying on these washed out colors. The more I look, the more I see they are "close but no cigar" when compared to the real thing. Maybe no one else sees it. Maybe no one else cares. For me it's something that I find aggravating.

Jeff Harper · September 22nd, 2012, 12:04 PM

Chip, which lenses do you shoot with? For example I have shot stunning video using the Olympus 12-60mm F/2.8-4.0 lens, with picture perfect colors that were a joy to behold, and I have shot horrible looking stuff using a Tamron zoom lens that had horrible color rendition for me.

I found for me that the LCD is unreliable, very tricky. For me a lot of guesswork.

Mike Leah · September 22nd, 2012, 12:25 PM

I almost always use the LCD for video. The only times I use the viewfinder is when I'm taking photos. For me the LCD always looks different than how the footage comes out so I guess I'm used to it by now.

I think the gh3 will be a nice upgrade. Maybe not a camera I will rush out to get but I'm sure eventually I will. The gh2 that I have still does everything I need quite well.
The gh3 should be a great product either way.

William Hohauser · September 22nd, 2012, 02:43 PM

I have long given up on exact colors but then I never really did any work for corporate clients who must have their product a certain color or all hell breaks loose. Way back in my film days there was always color differences in film stocks especially between the warm natural looking Kodak films and the intense blues and reds of Fuji stock. Later on when working with top of the line Ikegami video cameras there would occasionally be a subject who would be wearing a shade of purple that would not come out purple, either blue or red depending on which hue the purple was leaning to. Other purples worked fine. I have worked with other cameras that did the same thing with blue-greens, you would get a green or a blue but not the shade in front of the camera. Then the monitors have their own issues. A truly accurate monitor costs thousands of dollars.

I look to accurate flesh tones first and the rest later. The first question is, does the result look good on it's own?

Don Litten · September 22nd, 2012, 06:48 PM

Chip, I've found the same thing as Jeff. The lens has a tremendous influence on color, especially red. Distance seems to factor in also and I think some of it is that we aren't really seeing some of the reds we think we are.

I've also found the different hacks make a difference. I've been shooting the last few days with a new hack that seems to reproduce the reds very well and eliminate the yellow in foliage.

William is also right and he's also telling his age. I remember those days all too well.

I videoed the Slut Walk this morning and the color of the sign in this grab is about perfect

William Hohauser · September 22nd, 2012, 08:13 PM

The what walk?

Chip Thome · September 23rd, 2012, 12:48 AM

Jeff and Don..... it was the Panasonic Leica 45mm. So, if anything should have been optimized for the system, I would think that one should have been. BUT, if it's nice out tomorrow, I'll try a few I have here and see if that makes a difference. The video from France linked to earlier in this thread, although done under sodium lights, the saxophone also is completely washed out. The white balance for sodium lights have to be taken into consideration and may be why the sax isn't a nice brassy golden.

William, now that you mention it, I now think remembering having some of those same issues with my GSs when I was shooting those. I wasn't that fussy back then, was more worried about blow out imagery, than getting colors perfect.

When I am on some of the stills forums and seeing some of the images guys are getting, the colors are stunning and just seem to jump out at you. I suppose the difference between a still and video is the amount of information each "image" contains though.

Anyways, that's my bitch du jour and the one thing I really would hope we can see corrected.

Don Litten · September 23rd, 2012, 01:52 AM

It's certainly a legitimate gripe Chip.

Getting the most out of the GH2 is work. There are so many variables, I've never found a magic workflow.

Today I shot a group and had a total of 312 clips. Working on each individual clip to get the best color, then trying to grade it all to match takes forever and 3 days.

Then to make it worse, I just watched a comparison video of the 5D III to the Black Magic camera and the BM blew the MK III so far out of the water I hate to look at my finished product.

There is no end to it!

September 20th, 2012, 01:35 PM	#62
Bill Bruner Major Player Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Sunny California Posts: 513	Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz I have no illusions, the camera will not be perfect and already fails to live up to the initial hype (e.g., XLR accessory, 4:2:2 output from HDMI, etc.) - but I stil think it's worth $1299 and I put one on preorder because of the things I really need such as weathersealing, headphone jack, fully manual audio, and 1080/60p - but also because I'm blown away by Panasonic's decision to provide serious codec alternatives to AVCHD. This is a great decision that they're not getting enough credit for. Yes, BMCC-like or C300-like DR would have been nice, but what Panasonic really needed was better low light performance than the unhacked GH2 - and Bruce Logan's use of practical lighting in the traffic stop scene from Genesis seems to indicate that the GH3 delivers that. Cheers, Bill

September 20th, 2012, 02:54 PM	#63
Jeff Harper Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 8,425	Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz Under the hood there are major improvements to this camera, as you point out Bill. I don't care how jaded a person is, one cannot imagine such a price increase would be attempted for this camera were there not plenty of reasons to justify it. This is a major upgrade, much more significant then the GH1 to GH2. The increase in image quality may or may not be as dramatic, but in the many other improvements, yes, this is big. There will be the usual crop of folks who initially purchase the camera who will be disappointed that it cannot capture perfect images in unreasonably dark conditions using a slow stock lens, or other similar nonsense, but I suspect this camera will make plenty of people happy.

September 20th, 2012, 03:38 PM	#64
Thomas Smet Trustee Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Milwaukee, WI Posts: 1,719	Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz Upgrades are always just that, upgrades. I still stand by what I said that a lot of expectations of products today are typically unrealistic. I would love a camera to pour me a beer but I know it isn't going to happen. We see it happen all the time with Apple products and then when people don't get an iPhone with all the hyped features they are disappointed. It really seems like more people want to judge the GH3 for what it doesn't have then for what it does have.

September 20th, 2012, 03:59 PM	#65
Jeff Harper Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 8,425	Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz I can't imagine what more anyone could want, Thomas. In my case, an HDMI output that is not cripple as it was on the GH2 would be something I would be thrilled with.

September 22nd, 2012, 08:27 AM	#67
William Hohauser Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: New York City Posts: 2,650	Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz Which cameras get the color spectrum correct, for example? And which hues does the GH2 shift? __________________ William Hohauser - New York City Producer/Edit/Camera/Animation Last edited by William Hohauser; September 22nd, 2012 at 08:59 AM.

September 22nd, 2012, 10:11 AM	#68
Chip Thome Major Player Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Green Bay Wisconsin Posts: 553	Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz Hi William.... not sure about other cameras, not looking to switch systems. But the first glaring example came when I tossed the GH2 out my front door to do some testing. There's a stop sign, relatively new stop sign, 79' away. My eyes see a bright blood red. The footage, that's a nice orangey red color. Tried 6 different modes and got six orangey red stop signs. That's when I really started looking and found my disappointment in these camera lying on these washed out colors. The more I look, the more I see they are "close but no cigar" when compared to the real thing. Maybe no one else sees it. Maybe no one else cares. For me it's something that I find aggravating.

September 22nd, 2012, 12:04 PM	#69
Jeff Harper Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 8,425	Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz Chip, which lenses do you shoot with? For example I have shot stunning video using the Olympus 12-60mm F/2.8-4.0 lens, with picture perfect colors that were a joy to behold, and I have shot horrible looking stuff using a Tamron zoom lens that had horrible color rendition for me. I found for me that the LCD is unreliable, very tricky. For me a lot of guesswork.

September 22nd, 2012, 12:25 PM	#70
Mike Leah Regular Crew Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: east coast Posts: 91	Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz I almost always use the LCD for video. The only times I use the viewfinder is when I'm taking photos. For me the LCD always looks different than how the footage comes out so I guess I'm used to it by now. I think the gh3 will be a nice upgrade. Maybe not a camera I will rush out to get but I'm sure eventually I will. The gh2 that I have still does everything I need quite well. The gh3 should be a great product either way.

September 22nd, 2012, 02:43 PM	#71
William Hohauser Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: New York City Posts: 2,650	Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz I have long given up on exact colors but then I never really did any work for corporate clients who must have their product a certain color or all hell breaks loose. Way back in my film days there was always color differences in film stocks especially between the warm natural looking Kodak films and the intense blues and reds of Fuji stock. Later on when working with top of the line Ikegami video cameras there would occasionally be a subject who would be wearing a shade of purple that would not come out purple, either blue or red depending on which hue the purple was leaning to. Other purples worked fine. I have worked with other cameras that did the same thing with blue-greens, you would get a green or a blue but not the shade in front of the camera. Then the monitors have their own issues. A truly accurate monitor costs thousands of dollars. I look to accurate flesh tones first and the rest later. The first question is, does the result look good on it's own? __________________ William Hohauser - New York City Producer/Edit/Camera/Animation

September 22nd, 2012, 06:48 PM	#72
Don Litten Major Player Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Richmond Va Posts: 400	Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz Chip, I've found the same thing as Jeff. The lens has a tremendous influence on color, especially red. Distance seems to factor in also and I think some of it is that we aren't really seeing some of the reds we think we are. I've also found the different hacks make a difference. I've been shooting the last few days with a new hack that seems to reproduce the reds very well and eliminate the yellow in foliage. William is also right and he's also telling his age. I remember those days all too well. I videoed the Slut Walk this morning and the color of the sign in this grab is about perfect Attached Thumbnails

September 22nd, 2012, 08:13 PM	#73
William Hohauser Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: New York City Posts: 2,650	Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz The what walk? __________________ William Hohauser - New York City Producer/Edit/Camera/Animation

September 23rd, 2012, 12:48 AM	#74
Chip Thome Major Player Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Green Bay Wisconsin Posts: 553	Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz Jeff and Don..... it was the Panasonic Leica 45mm. So, if anything should have been optimized for the system, I would think that one should have been. BUT, if it's nice out tomorrow, I'll try a few I have here and see if that makes a difference. The video from France linked to earlier in this thread, although done under sodium lights, the saxophone also is completely washed out. The white balance for sodium lights have to be taken into consideration and may be why the sax isn't a nice brassy golden. William, now that you mention it, I now think remembering having some of those same issues with my GSs when I was shooting those. I wasn't that fussy back then, was more worried about blow out imagery, than getting colors perfect. When I am on some of the stills forums and seeing some of the images guys are getting, the colors are stunning and just seem to jump out at you. I suppose the difference between a still and video is the amount of information each "image" contains though. Anyways, that's my bitch du jour and the one thing I really would hope we can see corrected.

September 23rd, 2012, 01:52 AM	#75
Don Litten Major Player Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Richmond Va Posts: 400	Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz It's certainly a legitimate gripe Chip. Getting the most out of the GH2 is work. There are so many variables, I've never found a magic workflow. Today I shot a group and had a total of 312 clips. Working on each individual clip to get the best color, then trying to grade it all to match takes forever and 3 days. Then to make it worse, I just watched a comparison video of the 5D III to the Black Magic camera and the BM blew the MK III so far out of the water I hate to look at my finished product. There is no end to it!