PDA

View Full Version : Should I dump my L.Extreme to get a GH1



NC17z
06-16-2009, 01:06 PM
Do you think I would benifit more by dumping my Letus Extreme and purchasing a GH1 ? I use the Extreme ocasionaly with my HPX170. Will I get a beter image quality by using the GH1 vs. the HPX170 and the Letus Extreme with Nikon Glass?
I'm aware I can't use fast shutter speeds past like 160.

Cassius
06-16-2009, 03:41 PM
No. The GH1 is nowhere near the HPX170 as far as quality video cameras are concerned, both in image quality and usability. But if you need some extra cash it would be fine.

Nik Manning
06-16-2009, 04:47 PM
What do you shot? Remember you would probably shot more if you always had the GH1 around.

NC17z
06-16-2009, 05:08 PM
Nik, That is exactly what I'm thinking. The Extreme on the HPX is a beast. I probably would shoot more.

Kevin I
06-16-2009, 06:23 PM
I was using a DIY DOF adapter on an FX1 but it was just too cumbersome and I rarely got up the motivation to take it out for shooting.

I later downsized to an HC1 and a Jag35 DOF adapter. While a lot better than the FX1 combo as far as portability goes, it's still a pain to set up and shoot with.

I just got my GH1 and it was the only camera I took on a trip to Guam last week. My wife's jaw literally dropped when we were at the airport and she realized that I ONLY had the GH1 -- instead of my usual huge backpack with DSLR, lenses, flash, hoods, video camera, batteries, tapes, accessories galore.

It was extremely liberating to have a single hybrid camera that can do a good job with both stills and video.

However!

I'm now struggling with the video from the GH1. I shot in FHD 1920x1080 mode and it looks pretty horrid playing the AVCHD files on a PS3 connected to a 50" plasma TV (no HDMI on the TV). Stuttering motion galore, and now I'm trying to see how I can salvage the footage.

Also, the 1920x1080 17mbps stream is so compressed that artifacts are clearly visible most of the time. I'm now thinking that I may have to limit the camera to 1280x720 MJPEG mode to get more tolerable video.

So I guess it boils down to a trade off between convenience and quality.

...

One more thing about the look of the footage...

A DOF adapter can give that retro film look which can be nice (or limiting) -- muted colors, soft corners, vignetting, slightly loss of sharpness. On the other hand, the GH1 video is very crisp and doesn't look like film at all, IMO.

-Kevin

brian hanson
06-17-2009, 02:58 PM
i own an hvx200 with a redrock and i love shooting with it, however the thing is massive and i shoot action sports with it. i initially thought of dumping it all for the gh1 but video quality wise i just dont see the gh1 even getting close to the hvx, i would like to hear a rebutal for the gh1 though . . .

John Caballero
06-17-2009, 03:14 PM
I wonder, if you have a lot of people using the GH1 and posting very good looking footage already and people complaining about getting bad footage what does that tell you? That somebody is doing something wrong. Illya Friedman posted some tips on settings for better footage, Kholi shot good stuff with it and Jack Daniel Stanley posted an action sequence that looked extremely well. In addition to countless footage on You Tube and Vimeo. I don’t have a camera yet but I know that I will have to do a lot of testing before I use it for something important. The 17mbits are proving of no consequence in most of the footage. You can even do color correction to it with no problems.

Ben_B
06-17-2009, 03:32 PM
Keep the HPX-170 and your Letus if you're doing serious filmmaking. You can run and gun with the things sans adapter, and with the adapter you'll get a better image than anything the GH1 can put out. If you're trying to do some more casual stuff and the adapter is too much of a hassle to deal with regularly but you're not getting the shots you want without it, by all means ditch it for a GH1. You can shoot shots that have need of that look with the GH1 and I have a feeling it won't be all so bad to mix footage between that and a stock lens HPX-170...the fact that you can easily carry and use both is worth noting too....

In conclusion it's up to you, as a filmmaker I would keep your original setup, maybe save up for the GH1, and if after using it and owning it you find yourself never using your Letus, sell the Letus and recoup the cost. But if you're doing lots of work in the field, or say, doing wedding videography, then having two cameras that you can carry on you at once, one of which is very small and can quickly be used to get shots that you normally would get with a DOF adapter, then by all means opt for two cameras... :)

tackleqb
06-17-2009, 11:06 PM
but video quality wise i just dont see the gh1 even getting close to the hvx

I am going to have to disagree with that. I owned a HVX and a redrock and I am sorry, I just did not like the HD image of the HVX, and I am not going to jump to any conclusions since I don't own a GH-1 yet but from what I have seen so far I bet I the GH-1 will produce a better HD image as compared to the HVX200 and the dreaded noise it produces so I don't know where you are basing your assumptions. Not only that but the redrock is a HUGE hassle to lug around and if you have the early version then you know that you need to bring around the SUN as a light for you or your gunna be in lowlight where ever you go. With the GH-1 you will get good DOF without lugging around a ten pound adapter and the HD image is probably just as good if not better.

Huy Vu
06-17-2009, 11:36 PM
... the HD image is probably just as good if not better.

How would you know this if you haven't used a GH1? I recommend you download the torrent of the raw GH1 files in the Footage section to check out. I messed around with them and I'll say that the AVCHD implementation on this camera is far from perfect. The codec breaks very easily in high detail scenes (i.e water flowing), and there have been plenty of reports where camera movement can cause macroblocking. Personally it's not enough to be a deal breaker for me but the HVX certainly has a much more robust codec implementation.

PappasArts
06-18-2009, 01:47 AM
This is so far one of the best I have seen from a 1080/24fps clip shot with the GH1. This looks better than my hd100, H1, A1, or HVX200 could ever do in the same conditions. As well; none of those had the awesome lens options with a large sensor too like the GH1 offers! Oh, and my HV20, can't touch this either ( LOL ), with or without an adapter....


Download the 1080P version before you judge it.

http://www.vimeo.com/5179973

Here is the DVXuser thread this is from:

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=174543




Michael Pappas
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms

*****Anamorphic DSLR Lens Test Images... links:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1638289&postcount=97
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1637705&postcount=84
Facebook & Myspace:
http://www.facebook.com/people/Michael-Pappas/573417404
http://www.Myspace.com/PappasArts
http://www.PappasArts.com
AOL AIM { PAPPASARTS2 }

tackleqb
06-18-2009, 05:02 AM
How would you know this if you haven't used a GH1? I recommend you download the torrent of the raw GH1 files in the Footage section to check out. I messed around with them and I'll say that the AVCHD implementation on this camera is far from perfect. The codec breaks very easily in high detail scenes (i.e water flowing), and there have been plenty of reports where camera movement can cause macroblocking. Personally it's not enough to be a deal breaker for me but the HVX certainly has a much more robust codec implementation.

Okay have you even used a HVX200? It's not even full HD my friend, its resolution is poor at 960540 pixels not only that but I bet you haven't used that camera in low light, ha it's sad, really sad. GH-1 can at-least achieve a higher resolution which is definitely a deal breaker, it produces almost no noticeable noise, and its superb in lowlight, setting aside codec break up on 1080 which you can easily work around, resolution you cannot work around that sorry, your stuck with what you got. not only that but the GH-1 is a fourth of the size, has a redrock essentially already built in if you know what I mean, and its a tenth of the weight. Thats a deal breaker to me. I'll buy a GH-1 and hold it till the next firmware update.

Ben_B
06-18-2009, 09:00 AM
Okay have you even used a HVX200? It's not even full HD my friend, its resolution is poor at 960540 pixels not only that but I bet you haven't used that camera in low light, ha it's sad, really sad.

I would like to take this time to point out to all those refering to the various shortcomings of the HVX200 (many of which are shared, but some, like poor low light, are probably not) that the poster is asking about the HPX170, not the HVX200. The HPX170 makes some substantial improvements on the HVX200 not only in useability and design but also in image quality.

How many of you here have used an HPX170 and...well to make it fair, and/or GH1?

That's what I thought. HPX170 ≠ HVX200.

That is all.

tackleqb
06-18-2009, 09:47 AM
I would like to take this time to point out to all those refering to the various shortcomings of the HVX200 (many of which are shared, but some, like poor low light, are probably not) that the poster is asking about the HPX170, not the HVX200. The HPX170 makes some substantial improvements on the HVX200 not only in useability and design but also in image quality.

How many of you here have used an HPX170 and...well to make it fair, and/or GH1?

That's what I thought. HPX170 ≠ HVX200.

That is all.

Cool Dude! :Drogar-SunGlass(DBG

ps does the poster really refer to the HPX170 because the last time I checked it said:

"Should I dump my L.Extreme to get a GH1"

hm yeah thats what I thought..

Ian-T
06-18-2009, 09:55 AM
How many of you here have used an HPX170 and...well to make it fair, and/or GH1?
Kholi... :)

edsonkwushu
06-18-2009, 10:05 AM
First time poster, and I've been interested in this what the GH-1 can do for digital indie filmmaking, but a couple concerns I ran across was this:

1) How does the image from the GH-1 look on an HD TV compared to other cameras? For indie features aiming for HD-DVD/Blueray distribution, I assume this is EXTREMELY important, because if the image is no good when a consumer pops it in their TV the distributor will likely not buy the film.

2) How does the image from the GH-1 look blown up on a projector compared to other cameras? I've seen the Canon 5D Mark II at a recent 48hr film Festival in San Francisco and it was probably the sharpest-looking video, but I doubt anyone has seen GH-1 footage blown up?

Anyway, just my thoughts. To me, pixels and what not, if the image looks good on both these fronts and doesn't distract the viewer, for $1500, it sounds like a good bet!

Mike@AF
06-18-2009, 12:10 PM
Cool Dude! :Drogar-SunGlass(DBG

ps does the poster really refer to the HPX170 because the last time I checked it said:

"Should I dump my L.Extreme to get a GH1"

hm yeah thats what I thought..

Yes he does. Try reading the first post in this thread.

Mike@AF
06-18-2009, 12:11 PM
Excellent questions, edsonkwushu. I was going to ask this very question myself as someone looking at offloading my HVX200 package for the GH1 for a while.

Ben_B
06-18-2009, 12:31 PM
Cool Dude! :Drogar-SunGlass(DBG

ps does the poster really refer to the HPX170 because the last time I checked it said:

"Should I dump my L.Extreme to get a GH1"

hm yeah thats what I thought..


His letus extreme that he uses with what? Oh, his hpx 170. If all he had was a letus and no camera there really wouldn't be a question :). Half the advice given referred to hvx200 not hpx170, incorrectly.

John Caballero
06-18-2009, 12:41 PM
Do you think I would benifit more by dumping my Letus Extreme and purchasing a GH1 ? I use the Extreme ocasionaly with my HPX170. Will I get a beter image quality by using the GH1 vs. the HPX170 and the Letus Extreme with Nikon Glass?
I'm aware I can't use fast shutter speeds past like 160.


That is what the original poster actually wrote.


1) How does the image from the GH-1 look on an HD TV compared to other cameras? For indie features aiming for HD-DVD/Blueray distribution, I assume this is EXTREMELY important, because if the image is no good when a consumer pops it in their TV the distributor will likely not buy the film.

2) How does the image from the GH-1 look blown up on a projector compared to other cameras? I've seen the Canon 5D Mark II at a recent 48hr film Festival in San Francisco and it was probably the sharpest-looking video, but I doubt anyone has seen GH-1 footage blown up?


Go thru the posts and you will find out about the experiences of some early users. Kholi, Illya Friedman, Barry Green, Philip Bloom and a few others have touched on the subjects so far. We are still too ealrly on the release of the camera to have much more feedback.

Kevin I
06-18-2009, 03:39 PM
I'm not familiar with the HVX video quality, but I work with HDV a lot for corporate videos.

The GH1 AVCHD video is noticably inferior to HDV and at 1080 60i it really does fall apart when the whole scene is moving.

On a scale of 1 to 10 (10 being best) and if you place HDV at about a 7... IMO the GH1 is about a 6 for relatively static shots, and when you introduce camera movement that quickly goes down to a 4, 3 or even 2.

If you get one, you'd have to learn the limitations of the codec and try to work around them.

John Caballero
06-18-2009, 03:42 PM
Totally incorrect but we are all entitled to our opinions. HDV is not very good and will become obsolete.

In the meantime enjoy this little piece:

http://vimeo.com/groups/gh1/videos/5206829 (http://vimeo.com/groups/gh1/videos/5206829)

and this one too:

http://vimeo.com/groups/gh1/videos/5179973 (http://vimeo.com/groups/gh1/videos/5179973)

Kevin I
06-18-2009, 04:05 PM
John,

Are you referring to my post as being totally incorrect? If so, is that in regards to HDV or the GH1 quality?

I am not advocating the HDV format over any other. I was simply stating that I use it a lot for work and am familiar with its shortcomings and image quality level, and so I used HDV as a basis for my comparison with the GH1 footage.

After using the GH1 for over a week now for personal use, and viewing the video on a 50" HDTV, I have to say that I'm slightly disappointed with the image quality.

I'll keep it, and I love the shallow DOF and low light performance... but I'll have to be more careful about keeping the shots within the limits of what the 17mbps stream can handle.

tackleqb
06-18-2009, 06:08 PM
His letus extreme that he uses with what? Oh, his hpx 170. If all he had was a letus and no camera there really wouldn't be a question :). Half the advice given referred to hvx200 not hpx170, incorrectly.

who cares? the convo turned into a rant about HVX, get over it. :nads:

eL ProduceR
06-19-2009, 01:07 AM
Just some food for thought, sharpest example I've seen of a hpx170/letus combo:
http://vimeo.com/5212134

NC17z
06-20-2009, 07:20 PM
Just some food for thought, sharpest example I've seen of a hpx170/letus combo:
http://vimeo.com/5212134


Thanks for the post... It blows my mind what the HPX170 can do in the right hands...

Huy Vu
06-21-2009, 10:05 PM
Okay have you even used a HVX200?

Yes I have, for your information. It's not my primary camera but I have worked with it extensively on several films and corporate projects.


not only that but I bet you haven't used that camera in low light, ha it's sad, really sad.

You would have lost that bet. I have used the camera in both low light and well lit situations. It's low light capability is about on par with the cameras that's been released at the same time (i.e the XH-A1, Sony V1U, FX1, Z1, JVC HD110 etc.) which is acceptable. The 200a and HPX170 have vastly improved lowlight and noise performance. There's a bit more noise in the dark area than I would have liked, but nothing that stands out. As a DP I tend to light the scene well anyway so it's not a big deal.


GH-1 can at-least achieve a higher resolution which is definitely a deal breaker, it produces almost no noticeable noise, and its superb in lowlight,

Where are you getting this information since you admit you don't own a GH1? Can you show me res chart, side by side comparison for resolution and noise? Looking at compressed footages posted online is not the same thing as seeing it with your own eyes my friend. I downloaded some raw GH1 footage to play around with and to my eyes this is definitely as sharp as say, my XH-A1, let alone the GH1. Pixels doesn't always translate to resolution.


setting aside codec break up on 1080 which you can easily work around

How?


I'll buy a GH-1 and hold it till the next firmware update.

To each his own.