PDA

View Full Version : GH1 vs. HV20



xbourque
06-27-2009, 06:59 PM
Hey everyone,

Fellow dvxuser member PhilD graciously offered to swing by with his brand new GH1. Being an HV20 user myself, it was only natural to put them side by side on a tripod and pixel peep!

So there you go, a split-screen fest of GH1 vs. HV20:

http://www.vimeo.com/5353848

(Not sure why it's not showing as HD yet... anyways, you should download the full HD QuickTime movie from Vimeo.).

The HV20 was in Cinemode (except for that one shot in Av mode) and the GH1 was in FHD 1920x1080. Film mode was set to "smooth".

I'll everyone draw their own conclusions.

For now, I'll just say that for HV* owners, the GH1 isn't necessarily a slam dunk upgrade.

-- Xavier


http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/attachment.php?attachmentid=11639&d=1246153048
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/attachment.php?attachmentid=11640&d=1246153099
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/attachment.php?attachmentid=11641&d=1246153099
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/attachment.php?attachmentid=11642&d=1246153099
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/attachment.php?attachmentid=11643&d=1246153099
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/attachment.php?attachmentid=11646&d=1246153150
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/attachment.php?attachmentid=11647&d=1246153150
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/attachment.php?attachmentid=11644&d=1246153099
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/attachment.php?attachmentid=11648&d=1246153150
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/attachment.php?attachmentid=11645&d=1246153150

rubberbandito
06-27-2009, 07:23 PM
for once i look at a post not about shipping. waiting for mine so desperately. and i am surprised now. the little hv20 is amazing. i'd say it about a tie, since in some the images of the gh1 are much better, but in motion the mud of the gh1 is messy, not in the hv. but the still image ability in the gh1 make it much more versatile for a videographer/journalist/photographer. thanks for this post.

stav1606
06-27-2009, 08:08 PM
Not only the still images. The HV20 does not have interchangeable lenses, it does not have such a good low light, the DOF is much larger and it is not full HD anyway.

The only thing that makes the GH1 not entirely better is the mud, which I have no idea whether it is unfixable, or if it is fixable if they are willing to fix it...

Ken7
06-27-2009, 08:09 PM
That's the bottom line, the GH1 takes superb stills which the HV20 can't begin to match. In terms of video, the two are pretty close, but I'd probably give the nod to the HV20 since I'm not a fan of motion stutter and that leaves me to 720p. I like the HV20's 1080i video better than the GH1's 720p.

Now if they were able to get a 1920X1080 60i mode in the GH1, that would be an amazing video camera.

Ben_B
06-27-2009, 08:40 PM
The GH1 takes the cake with better image quality and better DOF out of the box.

This reminds me of watching the 5D mkII next to the D5000....HV20 and D5000 are washed out and little detail, the GH1 and MKII being colorful, contrasty, and detailed.

xbourque
06-27-2009, 10:13 PM
the GH1 and MKII being colorful, contrasty, and detailed.

Too much contrast in camera can be a problem (crushed blacks, clipped whites).
It's easy to shoot flat and to add contrast in post if you want it. It's much trickier to bring back shadow detail if it has been crushed, especially on heavily compressed footage.

- X

stephenvv
06-27-2009, 11:22 PM
Thanks - much appreciated. Did you shoot any lowlight?

dmoreno
06-28-2009, 12:05 AM
I believe the contrast on the GH1 can be dialed down to -2 in the contrast menu. Maybe it will help the black crushing.
I also think the HVs Cinemode is kind of soft (I set sharpness to +1 when I use it on my HV30).

reaktor
06-28-2009, 12:09 AM
The GH1 seems to have a lower dynamic range. I wonder if it is still present with different film modes.

timbook2
06-28-2009, 01:18 AM
nice test ! :thumbup:

dacloo
06-28-2009, 02:31 AM
great test. Panning "mud" is terrible on the GH1.
You made me decide not to buy the GH1!

PappasArts
06-28-2009, 02:39 AM
Hmmmm. We know the GH1 isn't perfect, however $1,499 for a removable large 12 mega pixel sensor camera is one hell of a leap in video acquisition technology at this price point; especially for a V.1 product!


Hunters GH1 test frames are way better then this GH1 did.

Look at the close up of hunter in the car mirror. The close up in this HV20 VS GH1 test looks like vaseline was smeared on it. The wood shop frame was 1600iso and it's way better than the best of these HV20 vs GH1 tests.


Take a look for your self: http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1623056&postcount=1

Or these indoor 1600iso shots : http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1623098&postcount=11

This 720P/60 : http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1623265&postcount=51


Direct link to : 1080/24 GH1 pics
Frame:1
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/attachment.php?attachmentid=10791&d=1241039195

Frame:2
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/attachment.php?attachmentid=10789&d=1241039195

Frame:3 Grey scale chart
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/attachment.php?attachmentid=10788&d=1241039195

Frame:4 1600 iso shot
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/attachment.php?attachmentid=10790&d=1241039195

Other GH1 frames; Phil Bloom:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/attachment.php?attachmentid=10822&d=1241059334
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/attachment.php?attachmentid=10820&d=1241059334
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/attachment.php?attachmentid=10824&d=1241059334
http://philipbloom.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/still3.jpg
http://philipbloom.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/still4.jpg
http://philipbloom.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/still6.jpg
http://philipbloom.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/still5.jpg
http://philipbloom.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/still7.jpg
http://philipbloom.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/still8.jpg
http://philipbloom.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/still9.jpg
http://philipbloom.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/still.jpg






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
Arrfilms@hotmail.com
http://www.PappasArts.com

.

sunburst
06-28-2009, 02:54 AM
downloading it now.

first shot looks almost identical, except gh1 looks too much sharpening.

I have the hv20 - arent they super cheap now?

great camera, but experienced users will get a little tired of the manual
workarounds - lol. and the super DEPTH OF FIELD - you could shoot Citizen
Kane with the hv20.

I may have both cams soon.

Not sure what country I will buy it in though....... see my other post if
you want to give me tips where to safari for it .................

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=175414

Norbert
06-28-2009, 04:42 AM
I would argue that the GH1 has about the same amount of detail in shadows and highlights as the HV20, and with even better looking roll offs. You just have to bring the detail back in post like I have done here. The HV20 image is untouched and the GH1 image is treated with curves and a little bit of upped saturation to match the HV20 better. Look at his arms and legs and compare with the originals in the first post.

http://img8.imageshack.us/img8/2486/matchbev.jpg (http://img8.imageshack.us/i/matchbev.jpg/)

http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/9892/match2.jpg (http://img193.imageshack.us/i/match2.jpg/)

stephenvv
06-28-2009, 07:32 AM
Look at his arms and legs and compare with the originals in the first post. Yeah, it would be nice to see a much more controlled test as the Cinemode setting in the HV is very flat and GH1 clearly is using much more contrasty curve.

Ian-T
06-28-2009, 07:35 AM
Too much contrast in camera can be a problem (crushed blacks, clipped whites).
It's easy to shoot flat and to add contrast in post if you want it. It's much trickier to bring back shadow detail if it has been crushed, especially on heavily compressed footage.

- XThat's just it though, you can still bring back a lot more information from the blacks in post with the GH-1 compared to the HV20. I've had the HV20 from day one now and I can see a tremendous difference in the quality. I've played with dozens of GH-1 Vimeo downloads (even Phil Blooms) and was able to pull out much more detail in the shadows and re-render the footage with no serious repercussions.

stav1606
06-28-2009, 07:46 AM
I've played with dozens of GH-1 Vimeo downloads and was able to pull out much more detail in the shadows and re-render the footage with no serious repercussions.

That is good to hear because this test made me doubt my will to buy the GH1.

Ian-T
06-28-2009, 08:07 AM
I made my mind up to get the 5D ll recently but my finaces took a hit so Imight end up getting the GH-1. But even if the GH-1's dynamic range was not better than the HV20 it sold me on its ability to put on just about any lens out there and of course beautiful bokeh. Those and its ability to do smooth slow motion are winners in my book.

stav1606
06-28-2009, 08:20 AM
I made my mind up to get the 5D ll recently
And why would you prefer the 5D?

pailes
06-28-2009, 10:32 AM
That's just it though, you can still bring back a lot more information from the blacks in post with the GH-1 compared to the HV20.
My experience from filming AVCHD with the HMC150 for the past few months is that you can basically forget about bringing back information from dark areas. AVC compression will be very strong in those areas and if you try to bring back that information all you will see are compression artifacts all over the place. But feel free to prove me wrong and post some examples where you could restore the blacks without the AVC compression artifacts, maybe it's different with the GH1.

dcloud
06-28-2009, 11:06 AM
yep. black areas are affected by the avchd (same goes for hdv).
as long as you shoot properly, its all good.

xbourque
06-28-2009, 11:20 AM
That's just it though, you can still bring back a lot more information from the blacks in post with the GH-1 compared to the HV20. I've had the HV20 from day one now and I can see a tremendous difference in the quality. I've played with dozens of GH-1 Vimeo downloads (even Phil Blooms) and was able to pull out much more detail in the shadows and re-render the footage with no serious repercussions.

Ian, the HV20 footage has less macroblocking in the shadows than the GH1. So whatever you're used to bringing back on the HV20, expect to bring back *less* with the GH1.

dmoreno
06-28-2009, 11:28 AM
Being an HV30 user for a couple of years I know the HV30 can perfectly do what the GH1 has problems doing: fast pans in 1080 24p, outputting realtime video for crane shots and the likes.
The GH1 can do lots of other things the HV30 can't as great shallow DOF shots and shots with really lowlight. It also has better manual controls.
I am planning on doing a fiction short soon and I believe both cameras will fill the other weaknesses perfectly. (If I can I will upgrade my HV30 to a Panasonic HMC150 for better manual control)
For event videography, which I also do from time to time, I believe using the HV30 in 30p mode and the GH1 in 60p mode will work great as 60p can easily be converted to 30p by dropping every other frame. Also slomo at 50% from 60p to 30p will look great. This would also be my workflow for family and friends stuff.

xbourque
06-28-2009, 11:35 AM
Hunters GH1 test frames are way better then this GH1 did.

Look at the close up of hunter in the car mirror. The close up in this HV20 VS GH1 test looks like vaseline was smeared on it.
.

Remember taht you are looking at half frames here. And while Hunter's close-up was shot on an overcast low-contrast day, our friend PhilD here was shot under bright sunlight, under a tree casting moving shadows on his face. The background was very busy with flowers, leaves and a brick wall. All this will tax the codec.

Finally, these stills might not be the sharpest frames (motion blur). I invite you to download the HD clip from Vimeo to have a more accurate picture.

--X

xbourque
06-28-2009, 11:47 AM
Thanks - much appreciated. Did you shoot any lowlight?

Did not do a side by side. At ISO 100 it felt already more sensitive than the HV20... since you can go to ISO 800 comfortably with it... my guess is that for lowlight the GH1 is the better cam of the two. (And the GH1 has proper manual controls, so you know what's going on).

commanderspike
06-28-2009, 12:07 PM
The clipped tones and contrasty image in those shots are a bit misleading, the GH1 is capable of some very smooth SLR like tones, and great dynamic range, which it should be able to do... because obviously it has a MUCH bigger sensor than the HV20.

Add in the lenses you can mate to the GH1 and it wins hands down, quibbles aside. Compared to what you get for the money the quibbles are just that... minor. But mud can be a nasty disabling factor in some situations. Panasonic should fix it.

John Caballero
06-28-2009, 12:08 PM
The GH1 is the best of the two period. There is absolutely no use in comparing them.

commanderspike
06-28-2009, 12:12 PM
It's a different class and era of technology, however well regarded the HV20 is, if the GH1 is handled right it will stuff the hell out of the HV20 especially in low light scenes and narrative film making, where DOF is important. More detail too.

xbourque
06-28-2009, 12:30 PM
the GH1 is capable of some very smooth SLR like tones, and great dynamic range, which it should be able to do...

If you have found any example movies with the stock lens, please share.

Also, anybody care to share the optimal settings to get smooth, low-contrast, film-like movies from the GH1?

--X

John Caballero
06-28-2009, 12:51 PM
There is a lot of stuff with the stock lens on the Vimeo GH1 channel. The fact is that the cam is not in many hands yet and the one's that have it are still learning it. The potential is huge and a lot of great stuff is gonna be filmed with it, count on that.

PappasArts
06-28-2009, 12:58 PM
If you have found any example movies with the stock lens, please share.

Also, anybody care to share the optimal settings to get smooth, low-contrast, film-like movies from the GH1?

--X

Your asking how to set this camera up now ( after your test ), however you took on the responsibility and performed a side by side when you haven't learned how to make the tool work at optimum.

IMO that is irresponsible and it generates a wave of unnecessary "FUD" that could be avoided if and when tests like these are done; it's by professionals that have the know how, and have learned how to get the most from each of the test pieces that they are evaluating.....

Next time, how about asking before hand, how to set up a piece of gear your new to; and then learn the best approach for your tests; so afterwards a test like this doesn't leave a bad taste in peoples mouth especially if afterwards, your asking " now how do I set up this camera to get it to perform at it's best "....



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
Arrfilms@hotmail.com
http://www.PappasArts.com

xbourque
06-28-2009, 01:11 PM
There is a lot of stuff with the stock lens on the Vimeo GH1 channel.

I meant low contrast, film-like stuff.

- X

stephenvv
06-28-2009, 01:17 PM
IMO that is irresponsible and it generates a wave of unnecessary "FUD" that could be avoided if and when tests like these are done; it's by professionals that have the know how, and have learned how to get the most from each of the test pieces that they are evaluating. Sure, we all want pro, scientific tests of this camera (lowlight vs HV20/30 please :) but let's not attack people for posting footage. I'm happy for this post and the time and effort that went into it. I want more and more controlled tests, but all the data is helpful.

xbourque
06-28-2009, 01:19 PM
Your asking how to set this camera up now ( after your test ), however you took on the responsibility and performed a side by side when you haven't learned how to make the tool work at optimum.

I'm sorry my testing methodologies were not up to your standards.

Feel free to post your own tests if you feel mine are sub-par.

Maybe I should have shot a cat and some close-ups of some flowers instead.

-- X

PappasArts
06-28-2009, 01:26 PM
Sure, we all want pro, scientific tests of this camera (lowlight vs HV20/30 please :) but let's not attack people for posting footage. I'm happy for this post and the time and effort that went into it. I want more and more controlled tests, but all the data is helpful.

Attack?

Isn't that a bit strong of an analysis!

Nobody was attacked. Don't be so dramatic!

I'm glad the tests were done, just not seeing the question afterwards for people to ( share the optimal settings ) when this could have been done before hand..


.

PappasArts
06-28-2009, 01:30 PM
I'm sorry my testing methodologies were not up to your standards.

-- X

Your right, they're not!





Maybe I should have shot a cat and some close-ups of some flowers instead.

-- X


No; I think that one has been over done a wee bit! Just wee bit!



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
Arrfilms@hotmail.com
http://www.PappasArts.com

Ben_B
06-28-2009, 01:31 PM
Panning mud isn't bad in 720p on GH1.

Also I think a thread contrasting the cameras rather than comparing might be worthwhile, how about we show the differences in DOF when both cameras are zoomed all the way in?

:)

xbourque
06-28-2009, 01:37 PM
I'm glad the tests were done, just not seeing the question afterwards for people to ( share the optimal settings ) when this could have been done before hand..



Well, just to appease your general malaise, PhilD did bring with him a printout of a very detailed tips/tricks sheet about the GH1 he found online.

We made sure to setup the camera according to the tip sheet. The big thing being to make sure to use the "Smooth" film mode (which we did).

Phil, can you chime in and tell everyone where you found this?

The reason I'm asking about settings, of course, is to see if we might have missed to boat completely and forgot something big.

At first glace, the "contrast" adjustment didn't appear to change the black and white points on the live histogram, btw, just the curve in between... so even if that was setup "wrong", that might not bring back a whole lot of detail.

Of course, all this yakking could be avoided if anybody here could post frame grabs from a GH1 movie that looked like the "SuperFlat" or "AdvancedFlat" picture styles that were built for the 5DII:

http://www.cinema5d.com/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=3401

--X

tonydvcoste
06-28-2009, 01:40 PM
these tests are very important, if i were to see this side by side two months ago i might have went with the HV30... ok well i definitely wouldn't have the GH1 is just too versatile but it definitely looks like this test was made by a canon rep, it seems the GH1's settings are set to to really bring out the mud in motion shots, I'm still yet to see mud this bad with my own GH1

PappasArts
06-28-2009, 01:45 PM
Of course, all this yakking could be avoided if anybody here could post frame grabs from a GH1 movie that looked like the "SuperFlat" or "AdvancedFlat" picture styles that were built for the 5DII:

http://www.cinema5d.com/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=3401

--X



Have you shot with the 5DMII? That camera is in another league! The 5D sensor is quite a technological achievement; then tailor that with the Digic chip set and it's just not comparable.

The standard setup on the 5D is contrasty; once it's set right, it takes on a smooth tonal look

I see what your trying to achieve, however the GH1 can get flatter, however the 5D is it's own!


I'm not aware that the GH1 has a 5D like ( Picture style editor ) setup in camera; or at least at the same level as the 5D.

That's where Kholi, Hunter and others that have owned both cameras should chime in..


.

dmoreno
06-28-2009, 01:55 PM
As long as the settings that were used are stated, any comparison is valuable. (even though those settings obviously affect how usefull each test is, but this can be subjective sometimes)
It is everyone of us that can come to it's own conclusions based on the facts.
To me, this test is very valuable, since it is the first time I see side-by-side shots of an HDV camera and the GH1.
I will like to know what shutter speeds were used (1/48 on the HV20 and 1/50 on the GH1 I guess, but still would like to have this confirmed since high shutter speeds increase the mud effect)

xbourque
06-28-2009, 01:58 PM
Have you shot with the 5DMII?

Yes, once, very briefly.



I see what your trying to achieve, however the GH1 can get flatter, however the 5D is it's own!


I'm not expecting the GH1 to got *that* flat, but I would expect it to be at least a bit flatter than my HV20, being a still camera and everything.

So, again, I would love if anybody proved that I screwed up.

Please post clips and setups that make the GH1 shine with high contrast, high detail scenes (such as the ones depicted in my fun little test).

Oh... make sure to include some pure green in there. :-)

I'm still suspicious of the colorspace conversion between the .MTS and ProRes that's performed by FCP, but I have no way to compare the original with the transcoded version.

-- X

xbourque
06-28-2009, 02:02 PM
I will like to know what shutter speeds were used (1/48 on the HV20 and 1/50 on the GH1 I guess, but still would like to have this confirmed since high shutter speeds increase the mud effect)

Please take a look at the video on Vimeo. Details are provided at the beggining and in the audio commentary.

In a nutshell: except for 1 shot, HV20 = 1/48s. GH1 = 1/50s.

-X

PappasArts
06-28-2009, 02:05 PM
I'm not expecting the GH1 to got *that* flat, but I would expect it to be at least a bit flatter than my HV20, being a still camera and everything.

-- X


Good question!

So does anyone know if the GH1 can go flatter than the HV20? I sure hope so too!

The GH1's DR comes from the photographic side, so its potential is beyond regular video cameras. Also the size of the sensor takes
it to a different realm.


.

rubberbandito
06-28-2009, 04:42 PM
For all this how about the Canon SX1 IS, a cheaper option then hv30 gh1 or 5D that if u ask me does compete if u r producing web videos at 1080p 30fps w/ 50mbps codec: side by side comparison here http://www.cameralabs.com/features/1080p_HD_video_comparison/GH1_vs_5D_Mark_II_vs_SX1_IS_vs_HX1.shtml

Martti Ekstrand
06-28-2009, 05:00 PM
I'll everyone draw their own conclusions.

For now, I'll just say that for HV* owners, the GH1 isn't necessarily a slam dunk upgrade.
As a "test" to judge from this is about as sloppy done as it can be. Especially since you call it a "deathmatch" on the speaker track.

To begin by not having NDs makes the "test" pretty ludicrous.

Both GH1 pictures in last row from bottom show interlace lines meaning you have incorrect pulldown removal or none at all which exaceberates 'mud'.

Now look at the foliage over the orange flowers next to Phli's elbow and the brick wall above. It's pretty clear the HV20 has lower detail sharpness than the GH1 meaning you'd have to artificially sharpen the image in post on everything to make it match. The HV20 looks upscaled, don't know what it actually does but the smaller sensor just don't come anywhere near GH1's resolution. It's in another word muddy all the time despite being in focus from glass to horizon.

Once you have GH1 at proper settings for moving images the motion blur and shallow DOF makes 'mud' not much of a problem when actually tracking people / objects during fast pans. The few frames I've seen it in my footage is nothing that a 2 minute job in Photoshop with the clone and heal tools wouldn't fix. Not that anybody would notice them in the first place when shown within a edited sequence.

The HV20 pictures don't have more range or are more 'film-like', they only draw black as 3-4% grey instead of 0% giving the illusion of being more flat while they actually only lack info. And who cares if the few last steps to black are lost on GH1 when the midtones on the HV20 are really lackluster and the highlights clipped. You can really pull the GH1 images further.


Please post clips and setups that make the GH1 shine with high contrast, high detail scenes
You have done it yourself, you just haven't understood it yet. QED:

xbourque
06-28-2009, 05:21 PM
As a "test" to judge from this is about as sloppy done as it can be.

I'm sorry if my test doesn't hold up to your high technical standards. Please feel free to make one yourself and post the results here.



Especially since you call it a "deathmatch" on the speaker track.


Next time I'll call it the "Care Bear Lovefest".



To begin by not having NDs makes the "test" pretty ludicrous.


We all know the GH1 owns the HV20 for shallow DOF. I was interested in field of view, codec robustness, dynamic range and color rendition. Not having NDs doesn't void any of these conclusions.



Both GH1 pictures in last row from bottom show interlace lines meaning you have incorrect pulldown removal or none at all which exaceberates 'mud'.


Both the HV20 footage and the GH1 footage went through JES Deinterlacer for pulldown removal. If you wish I can put an original MTS file online and you can remove the pulldown at your leisure. I assure you "mud" doesn't get much better then this.



Now look at the foliage over the orange flowers next to Phli's elbow and the brick wall above. It's pretty clear the HV20 has lower detail sharpness than the GH1


Well, the HV20 is 1440x1080, that is to be expected.



meaning you'd have to artificially sharpen the image in post on everything to make it match. The HV20 looks upscaled, don't know what it actually does but the smaller sensor just don't come anywhere near GH1's resolution.


I didn't sharpen anything. The HV20 footage is upscaled from 1440x1080 to 1920x1080 by FCP when you drop it on the same (1920x1080) timeline as the GH1 footage. The GH1 footage is 1:1.



Once you have GH1 at proper settings for moving images the motion blur


The GH1 was set at 1/50s shutter speed for all shots except 1 which is clearly identified in the caption.



and shallow DOF makes 'mud' not much of a problem when actually tracking people / objects during fast pans.


Mud shows up in the GH1 footage when I wave my hand in front of the (locked) camera. You don't have to move the camera around to have mud show up.



Not that anybody would notice them in the first place when shown within a edited sequence.


I do.



You have done it yourself, you just haven't understood it yet. QED:

Thanks for boosting the gamma on the shots. Now look at Phil's shorts in the shadows. Now tell me which camera recorded more shadow detail?

--X

PhilD
06-28-2009, 06:32 PM
For all this how about the Canon SX1 IS, a cheaper option then hv30 gh1 or 5D that if u ask me does compete if u r producing web videos at 1080p 30fps w/ 50mbps codec: side by side comparison here http://www.cameralabs.com/features/1080p_HD_video_comparison/GH1_vs_5D_Mark_II_vs_SX1_IS_vs_HX1.shtml

Lame comparison, you can see that he either
1) Had digital zoom on
2) Stabilized the video during post with iMovie or similar
3) Had a really bad case of Parkinson

Kholi
06-28-2009, 10:23 PM
Foreword: I was emailed this thread by the OP. Before any of you decide to jump my case.

Settings: Nostalgic, Contrast -1, Saturation -1, everything else -2, iContrast OFF, make sure Noise Reduction is actually off in the settings as well

ISO 160, 320, 640, 1250 should be the ones you use.

Try those if you're a GH-1 owner and curious.

It's great that the OP wanted to share some results. On one hand, not everyone can test a GH-1 before purchasing so it's helpful to see this stuff. I can understand it.

On the other hand, not everyone can test a GH-1 before purchase, so it's helpful to see this stuff done with both cameras at their utmost best. That does mean spending time figuring out settings, reading manuals, etc. Not specifically speaking to PhilD or anyone else, just in general.

Indeed, camera comparisons or image comparisons should be done with care and consideration. From the 35mm Adapter days, the people who did these properly have become the real testers. They put the cameras through paces and while there may have been some variables that could have been better, we knew that they took a heap of time preparing, studying, etc.

This is why I won't do a camera shootout: I don't have the patience to do it properly. And if it's not done properly it will always cause a riot on both sides of the fence.

With that said, you can't save everyone. Those of you irritated by this thread are probably better served putting the camera to good use and proving your points with well done imagery.

Again, thanks to the OP for the images. I would definitely encourage, in the future, to dig a little deeper. And, to everyone else, the real test isn't on a forum, it's in your hands shooting for yourself if you have the ability to do so.

Keep it civil!

xbourque
06-28-2009, 10:31 PM
Thanks Kholi. Well said.

-X

Ben_B
06-28-2009, 10:38 PM
Kholi from what I've heard would those settings make things pretty desaturated as well as kind of flat in terms of contrast? (overly?) What's the goal, sorry? Not have such high contrast for better dynamic range and detail in extremes?

Kholi
06-28-2009, 10:43 PM
Kholi from what I've heard would those settings make things pretty desaturated as well as kind of flat in terms of contrast? (overly?) What's the goal, sorry? Not have such high contrast for better dynamic range and detail in extremes?

Nostalgic's curve looked to be the one that netted the most range, to me anyway. The rest of the settings are my personal taste. I'm not a fan of shooting an image with lots of saturation or contrast. I like to see into the shadows being cast on faces, etc. With curves, it's pretty easy to draw contrast back without compromising the image. Quite the opposite with just about any sub 10K camera, bringing detail out of the shadows is a different story.

Ideally, though, you would want to shoot for a look in camera then tweak, in the very minor sense of the word, in post.

Ben_B
06-28-2009, 10:50 PM
Ideally, though, you would want to shoot for a look in camera then tweak, in the very minor sense of the word, in post.

I'd totally agree with that, I'd say shooting for the best dynamic range is good because you can always add some contrast in post, but you can't add detail to areas that didn't get it during production. For the same reason, unless I know I want a desaturated look, I usually shoot for bright, decently saturated colors because it's easy to desaturate them and tweak them during color grading, not so much if you shoot desaturated from the start....when shooting on the HVX I usually use either Barry's Filmic or War Epic, again depending whether we know we want a desaturated look or something else.

PappasArts
06-29-2009, 01:46 AM
Nostalgic's curve looked to be the one that netted the most range, to me anyway. The rest of the settings are my personal taste. I'm not a fan of shooting an image with lots of saturation or contrast. I like to see into the shadows being cast on faces, etc. With curves, it's pretty easy to draw contrast back without compromising the image. Quite the opposite with just about any sub 10K camera, bringing detail out of the shadows is a different story.

Ideally, though, you would want to shoot for a look in camera then tweak, in the very minor sense of the word, in post.

Kholi is -3 contrast as far as it goes. Is there a setting that in combo with the -3 contrast that will take it to even farther?

.

TrueIndigo
06-29-2009, 01:07 PM
Kholi -- what white balance would you recommend? Illya recommended 5500 kelvin (for daylight), and when I did that I was happier with the skin tones which had previously looked either a bit too pink or too yellow to me (depending on the film style).

I had been using ISO values such as 100 and 500, but I'll use your values (160, 320 and 640). When shooting interiors I find that I don't like going beyond 640 because it seems a bit grainy -- is it just me? People originaly said ISO 800 looked clean, but I don't see it that clean.

Out of the film styles I found Smooth and Nostalgic to be closest to my preference; I have been shooting Smooth, but maybe I'll look at Nostalgic again. I usually have all four film style parameters set to -2. You have contrast set to -1, but I feel the image is on the contrasty side so use -2 (maybe I'm doing something else wrong?).

Thanks.
By the way, have you got your pair of GH1's yet?

Kholi
06-29-2009, 06:54 PM
Kholi is -3 contrast as far as it goes. Is there a setting that in combo with the -3 contrast that will take it to even farther?

.

If I remember right -3 or -2 is the furthest you can go. It's pretty far down when coupled with a desaturation, though.

Kholi
06-29-2009, 07:02 PM
Kholi -- what white balance would you recommend? Illya recommended 5500 kelvin (for daylight), and when I did that I was happier with the skin tones which had previously looked either a bit too pink or too yellow to me (depending on the film style).

I agree with Illya. In addition, there's a white balance tuning setting that lets you shift on a grid. I used that as well to tune the White Balance. Most of the time I was definitely at 5500. It's a habit because all of my red stuff's shot at 5500K as well. Tune on the grid.

As well, google/amazon: CBL White Balance. If you can afford it, grab one.



I had been using ISO values such as 100 and 500, but I'll use your values (160, 320 and 640). When shooting interiors I find that I don't like going beyond 640 because it seems a bit grainy -- is it just me? People originaly said ISO 800 looked clean, but I don't see it that clean.

You know what? 160 increments might not be the GH-1's flavor. Maybe it's 200? Best thing to do is a locked down test indoors with yellow/3200k balanced light. see what you get. I always held around 320 when I shot, just used ND's or a fast lens when needed.



Out of the film styles I found Smooth and Nostalgic to be closest to my preference; I have been shooting Smooth, but maybe I'll look at Nostalgic again. I usually have all four film style parameters set to -2. You have contrast set to -1, but I feel the image is on the contrasty side so use -2 (maybe I'm doing something else wrong?).

Not wrong, just time to experiment.

I found Nostalgic to be the preset that worked for me the most. If you point the camera at your VCR or PS3, or Cable box, half of the frame over exposed and switch between the stock presets, nostalgic looks better in highs and lows. At least to me, and pulls more details otu of the shadows etc. Shadows, i'm not too worried about. But the more I can push the highs the better for myself.

Also, try this: set contrast to -2, point camera at a pitch black area the switch to -1. Does the dark area shift from "blueish" to "actual black"?

That's why I went to -1. I noticed it in my camera. In fact, you can probably throw the lens hood on and see it. If the image is too contrasty, look into a Tiffen Low Contrast filter.




Thanks.
By the way, have you got your pair of GH1's yet?


Not yet! The ONLY reason that I'm not flipping out is because I'm shooting RED for most stuff anyway, and we're in pre-production on the feature. That and I've been experimenting finding a way to make myself like the MKii, so I won't sell it.

I hate selling gear, even if I don't really use it or like it. =P

I think once I get rid of the Mkii I'll really start foaming at the mouth for my GH-1's. Right now, though, it's good not to be AS distracted as normal. Fourth Draft needs attention.

xD Have fun with the ultimate dream camera. I get jealous just looking at JDS's pics of the flip-out LCD in action. It's the best.

Northainan
06-30-2009, 03:14 AM
No Contest!! The GH1 wins in a blowout for me! This camera picks up detail very well in shadows. The photo of the lady and the kid with a house in the background with a bike on a balcony. I also saw a video on VIMEO where the GH1 picked up detail in the shadows. But really both cameras are better than a Super8 or or even Super 16. I guess it's all matter what a person want to do. The viewing public could not care less about any small subtle technical detail of a camera. Just as long the film does not look it's shot on home video camera or it does not look like a "bootleg" production. I just like the GH1 because I can use my Nikon lenses on it and it's range is great. Just wish it had a live HDMI. Looking forward to a thread how to hack into GH1 LCD screen to attach an external monitor, I know it's coming. lol

TrueIndigo
06-30-2009, 10:44 AM
Thanks, Kholi. I was not aware of the white balance fine adjustment (some of my natural light interiors set at 5500k looked generally ok, but had a slight greenish tint in some areas which this adjustment might help).

I forgot to ask: are you using Creative Movie mode? This is what I am using to shoot video (with manual exposure of aperture, shutter speed and ISO). Recently I accidentally turned the camera to M (ie. still camera manual mode), and the image looked quite different -- I suddenly wondered if everyone else is shooting video with M mode!

PappasArts
06-30-2009, 11:23 AM
Recently I accidentally turned the camera to M (ie. still camera manual mode), and the image looked quite different -- I suddenly wondered if everyone else is shooting video with M mode!

So in what way did the recorded video look different?


.

TrueIndigo
06-30-2009, 02:26 PM
I had just been shooting some natural light interior experiments in Creative Movie mode; ISO was set to 500 and in the camera LCD the image looked quite dark. When I accidentally moved the mode dial to M (still camera manual mode), the view in the LCD suddenly got dramatically brighter as a result. This is why I thought other reports of clean low light shots may have been shot in a different mode to the one I used (ie Creative Movie mode). I seemed to remember someone suggesting not to shoot video in the still camera manual mode, but this is something I should start testing (unfortunately will have to wait for the weekend). Anyone have thoughts on this? Anyone shooting video in manual mode?

Ben_B
06-30-2009, 03:48 PM
Try using the creative video mode with the settings listed above in the thread by Kholi.

skital
07-02-2009, 12:22 PM
Ok, I just found this thread and I don't have time to go through it right now (gotta be at work soon), but I just bought an HV20 and was wondering if the settings or something were wrong on the Gh1? The HV20 looked vastly superior in a lot of the shots due to the guys skin being blown out white. That can't be how this camera really performs at it's best setting, right?

I am interested in the GH1 for the DOF and maybe the low light ability, but I wanna know it will match or exceed the skin tones of the HV20. I just wanna be assured the GH1 was crippled somehow, and what was up with the green trash bins being completely cyan?

Are these issues easily fixed? If so, should I go ahead and sell my HV20 for the GH1? I'm wanting to make films and I wanna design a follow focus setup. With my HV20 I will have to get an adapter an rail system + follow focus.

Thanks

Ben_B
07-02-2009, 12:29 PM
skital:
Keep the HV20 until GH1s are widely available, you won't even be able to find one right now >.< But yes the GH1 is the superior camera. This is not opinion. This is fact. Well, not really...but for what you described it is the camera you want.

mikeydvx
07-02-2009, 01:44 PM
Foreword: I was emailed this thread by the OP. Before any of you decide to jump my case.

Settings: Nostalgic, Contrast -1, Saturation -1, everything else -2, iContrast OFF, make sure Noise Reduction is actually off in the settings as well

ISO 160, 320, 640, 1250 should be the ones you use.

Try those if you're a GH-1 owner and curious.

It wasn't obvious to me that "film modes" apply to video. It's only referenced in the manual with respect to stills. Are you sure it applies to video too? Do you just activate film mode before taking a video?

Mike

Kholi
07-02-2009, 01:48 PM
The different profile settings definitely apply to video.

Norbert
07-03-2009, 05:15 AM
The HV20 looked vastly superior in a lot of the shots due to the guys skin being blown out white. That can't be how this camera really performs at it's best setting, right?The information is there, it's just very bright. Have a look at my post on page 2. (http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1675818&postcount=14)

mikeydvx
07-03-2009, 09:26 PM
The different profile settings definitely apply to video.

So the settings you recommend: are those for AVCHD or MJPEG? AVCHD and MJPEG render significantly different color to begin with: AVCHD looks more vibrant and MJPEG appears more muted.

Mike

skital
07-05-2009, 12:09 AM
for once i look at a post not about shipping. waiting for mine so desperately. and i am surprised now. the little hv20 is amazing. i'd say it about a tie, since in some the images of the gh1 are much better, but in motion the mud of the gh1 is messy, not in the hv. but the still image ability in the gh1 make it much more versatile for a videographer/journalist/photographer. thanks for this post.

I'm curious. Could you point out which shot looks much better in the screenshots posted? I looked at them all and felt the HV20 looked better on all of them and much better in many cases due to the blown out skin tones on the GH1 (which may have been a bad setting or something).

I'm just curious where these "much better" GH1 shots are out of curiosity since I couldn't find one that was better at all to my eyes.

PappasArts
07-05-2009, 12:17 AM
i'm just curious where these "much better" gh1 shots are out of curiosity since i couldn't find one that was better at all to my eyes.


yawn........ :-o

John Caballero
07-05-2009, 12:23 AM
I am sorry to say but if someone looks at the footage shot with the GH1 in this early stage of the camera's release and can't see its great potential that person must be blind or have absolutely no real knowledge of film production.

bluesgeek
07-05-2009, 08:48 AM
Perhaps that the starting point for some of us. I didn't know there were photography literacy requirements for asking questions here. skital seems to be asking for help in identifying issues in the images.

mikeydvx
07-05-2009, 02:54 PM
Still would like to know whether Kholi's settings are appropriate for AVCHD or MJPEG. AVCHD and MJPEG render significantly different color regardless of settings. I'm finding that this camera has so many different (and intertwined) settings that it's really too many settings: makes it almost impossible for any two people to generate videos with identical color... unless you outline every setting on the entire camera.

Mike

Kholi
07-05-2009, 03:24 PM
Avchd

I only used mjepg for random quick uploads. All other footage is avchd.

Lew2009
07-05-2009, 05:31 PM
Im also interested in purchasing the GH1 primarily for recording family events and wanted to see what it might look like at 1920 on my home theater screen, so this is what I did.
I downloaded the GH1 vs HV20 1920x1080@23.976fps .mov file from Vimeo and dropped it directly into Adobe Encore CS4.
Set Encore to output 1920x1080@23.976 H.264 at its high quality setting (Profile 4.1), and let Encore burn it directly to a Blu-ray disk.
I then dropped the Blu-ray into a Sony Blu-ray S550 player, set for 24fps output, and fed it via HDMI to a 1080p JVC-RS1 LCD projector which accepts 24fps.
I then proceeded to project it onto my 8 ft Stewart StudioTek 130 screen.

In terms ofimagesharpness between the HV20 and the GH1, its no contest, the GH1 easily wins.
The HV20 looks soft, you could immediately see the difference. I was quite surprised to see how well the GH1 held up on an 8ft screen.
Im not an expert on any of this stuff but I have viewed lots of studio released Blu-ray movies and the GH1s 1920x1080@24 holds up quite well on an 8 ft screen.
I wont have a problem watching it at this size.

boulder
07-06-2009, 07:33 PM
Thanks for the test xbourque (http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/member.php?u=47160) . I guess I am a little surprised at the people being jerks about xbourque's test here on this thread, I thought I was in the Red User forum for a minute. If you hate his test so much put up your own. I'm considering getting a GH1 to replace my HV20 because I want the compactness and also would like to have a great still camera, but that awful mud during the pan is totally unacceptable! I don't know how you guys can overlook something so troubling and call the GH1 the clear winner...wierd. I have decided I will wait and see about the Samsung NX and hope it is a little better. Again thanks for the test.