Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 44
  1. Collapse Details
    Reviewed: Canon 7D vs. Panasonic GH1
    #1
    Fest Master Larry Rutledge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Posts
    5,483
    Default
    Canon 7D vs. Panasonic GH1
    Is one of these "the new DVX"
    by Barry Green

    Click here to read the full article


     

  2. Collapse Details
    #2
    Senior Member Ian-T's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Back home in FLA
    Posts
    3,428
    Default
    Wow, this was an excellent read and basically sums up everything that I think about both cams. Thanks Barry. Spot on.

    The way these cams are “right now”, if I had the money, I would own both for their strengths. But, as your article suggest, I chose one for my particular need.


     

  3. Collapse Details
    #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    1,218
    Default
    Barry-

    Once again, thank u for doing the heavy lifting. As I have mentioned before, we are all better off because of your efforts to provide this forum with top notch analysis.

    So much of my business is talking head interviews. On top of that, I'm still delivering sd dvds to my clients.

    Because of my particular needs, I'm leaning towards the GH1 because of 720p being "good enough" for my down convert to 16x9 sd dvds. So I'll learn to run double system audio but at $800 for a GH1 body and several dollars more for 35mm lens, I'm sure I can create a sweet looking interview image.

    Thoughts?

    YMMV

    Be well

    Rob


     

  4. Collapse Details
    #4
    Default
    That setup can deliver gorgeous results, so long as you watch out for things that cause aliasing artifacts (certain patterns or fabrics, or thin-rimmed glasses). And you might want to invest in an inexpensive prime lens, a 50mm/1.4 should be easily available for under $50 and would make for a nice portrait look. The stock lens is plenty sharp, but at f/4 it doesn't really provide for that hyper-shallow depth of field look that makes certain interview shots so attractive.


     

  5. Collapse Details
    #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    1,218
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Barry_Green View Post
    That setup can deliver gorgeous results, so long as you watch out for things that cause aliasing artifacts (certain patterns or fabrics, or thin-rimmed glasses). And you might want to invest in an inexpensive prime lens, a 50mm/1.4 should be easily available for under $50 and would make for a nice portrait look. The stock lens is plenty sharp, but at f/4 it doesn't really provide for that hyper-shallow depth of field look that makes certain interview shots so attractive.
    barry-

    thanks for the quick feedback.

    your suggestions are exactly in line with my thinking-720p will give me 16x9 qnd plenty of pixels to down convert for the standard def dvds. a 50mm/1.4 or 1.7 decent glass prime along with a 28mm/2.8 and even a 85mm/2.8 would give me plenty of options.

    would you know what the multiplier factor is with the gh1?

    and then there is the whole double system audio and i'm good to go.

    lastly, how will final cut pro play with pannie's 720p codec from the gh1? i thought i remembered reading that it's a flavor of jpeg or something. care to explain further?

    as mentioned, thanks. if you are ever in nyc, i owe u a cup of decent coffee!

    be well

    rob


     

  6. Collapse Details
    #6
    Member drubynum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Baltimore, USA
    Posts
    59
    Default
    Fantastic article. Thank you for your hard work!
    Specializing in Bio Documentaries, Motion Graphics, & Fashion Films

    Follow me on Twitter:
    http://twitter.com/drurybynum

    Drury Bynum
    http://drurybynum.com
    drury@drurybynum.com
    mobile: 443.255.0085


     

  7. Collapse Details
    #7
    Senior Member Phil H.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    147
    Default
    I've been on the fence for a few weeks now. This has helped a lot. Thanks again, Barry.
    GH5s w/ 15+ lenses, sound & lighting gear - Available for rent/hire in the San Francisco Bay Area, and beyond. Have passport. Will travel.
    www.philliphudson.com


     

  8. Collapse Details
    #8
    Senior Member Sumfun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    1,446
    Default
    Thanks for another very informative article, Barry.

    Just curious why you chose Zeiss lenses over Nikon or Canon.


     

  9. Collapse Details
    #9
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Sumfun View Post
    Thanks for another very informative article, Barry.

    Just curious why you chose Zeiss lenses over Nikon or Canon.
    Because the construction quality and the optical quality are the most like true cinema lenses, at the most affordable price. The ZF lenses are the exact same glass that's used in the Zeiss Compact Primes PL-mount lens set. I actually considered getting a set of CP's, because I'm tired of dealing with the goofiness of still-camera lenses that were never designed for cinema work. But the $27,000 price tag for a set of four was quite off-putting, and the PL mount would make them unable to be used on something like a Canon or Nikon body.

    The ZFs, on the other hand, are 1/4 the price and have the identical same optical characteristics as the Compact Primes. The focus rings are exquisite, designed more for cinema use than the typical short-throw SLR focus ring. My 85mm lens has a 270-degree focus travel, it's just perfect. The Nikon mount makes them adaptable to pretty much any camera out there, whether Nikon, Canon, Panasonic, or Red. And after the Duclos modification, the iris ring becomes comparable to a cinema lens iris ring as well, and with standard gearing and standardized fronts, they pretty much overcome all the hassles of still lenses and deliver the visual quality of cinema primes. The only major annoyance left is that they focus backwards, because Nikon lenses focus backwards, but a follow focus with reverse gear will fix that.


     

  10. Collapse Details
    #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    1,218
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Barry_Green View Post
    Because the construction quality and the optical quality are the most like true cinema lenses, at the most affordable price. The ZF lenses are the exact same glass that's used in the Zeiss Compact Primes PL-mount lens set. I actually considered getting a set of CP's, because I'm tired of dealing with the goofiness of still-camera lenses that were never designed for cinema work. But the $27,000 price tag for a set of four was quite off-putting, and the PL mount would make them unable to be used on something like a Canon or Nikon body.

    The ZFs, on the other hand, are 1/4 the price and have the identical same optical characteristics as the Compact Primes. The focus rings are exquisite, designed more for cinema use than the typical short-throw SLR focus ring. My 85mm lens has a 270-degree focus travel, it's just perfect. The Nikon mount makes them adaptable to pretty much any camera out there, whether Nikon, Canon, Panasonic, or Red. And after the Duclos modification, the iris ring becomes comparable to a cinema lens iris ring as well, and with standard gearing and standardized fronts, they pretty much overcome all the hassles of still lenses and deliver the visual quality of cinema primes. The only major annoyance left is that they focus backwards, because Nikon lenses focus backwards, but a follow focus with reverse gear will fix that.
    Barry-

    After a quick Google search, I read the following:

    "Some years ago Zeiss licensed Kyrocera of Japan to use the name Zeiss on some lenses made for the Contax brand of cameras. Life was good.

    Contax went out of business in 2005, ending the need for these lenses. As soon as the agreement expired in 2006, Zeiss looked for something to do with the Japanese manufacturing capacity.

    Zeiss decided to put these former Contax mount lenses in Nikon mounts instead, and that's how we get these ZF lenses. These are new lenses made in Nikon mount.

    This lens is not made in Germany and it is not made in a Zeiss factory. It is made in Japan by Cosina, the same company that made the cheap FM-10 for Nikon and many other inexpensive lenses and cameras for third-party makers for many decades."

    http://www.kenrockwell.com/zeiss/zf50.htm

    Thoughts?

    Be well

    Rob


     

Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •