5d or GH3

J

JasonMillard81

Active member
I am curious on a few items regarding DSLR and mirrorless video making.


The 5d MK III is amazing in low light but is said to be soft
The GH3 is amazing in sub-800 ISO but is said to be to "home video" feeling for cinematic looks


The resolution and image quality on this GH3 video is stunning: https://vimeo.com/groups/gh3/videos/63349774


But the cinematic feel and hollywood quality of this is equally stunning:
https://vimeo.com/groups/5dmark/videos/49269403


Anyway to get the GH3 to look as cinematic? I'm thinking not if most of, if not all, the videos on Vimeo don't show that? Also What about getting the 5D to sharpen like the GH3? Not possible?


Seems like it's a trade off...


GH3: great sharp image but lack of cinematic feeling and poor ISO performance in low light
5D3: great cinematic feel and ISO performance in low light but not as crystal clear as the GH3


Not sure where to go regarding purchase!
 
You'll have to define what you mean by "cinematic feeling" as everyone seems to have a different idea of what this is.

There have been several feature films shot on the GH2 camera over the past year, the most recent one for me was Shane Carruth's "Upstream Color" which overall looked as "cinematic" to me as everything else I've seen on the big screen. ( my impression has always been that many people don't know what they are talking about when they say that a camera X looks more "cinematic" than camera Y )

Upstream Color : Currently playing in 104 Indie theaters across North America
 
A 5Dmk3 is a far better camera if you consider the end result and how easy it is to get great looking footage. I have both and find my GH3 to be full of features but also boring to shoot with.
 
I've shot with both and they match up pretty closely in good light.

If you want resolution and dynamic range get a Nikon.
 
I agree with the others who say "cinematic" is a subjective term, but the GH2 can be used to deliver a cinematic image from my perspective anyway. As long as the other elements are there, a GH2/5D3/GH3 won't be the limiting factor. Shot on a GH2, the first 5 minutes of Musgo look and sound great, again...just one guys opinion. So a GH3 or 5D3 should be just as capable.

http://vimeo.com/45596420
 
JasonMillard81 said:
GH3: great sharp image but lack of cinematic feeling and poor ISO performance in low light
5D3: great cinematic feel and ISO performance in low light but not as crystal clear as the GH3


Not sure where to go regarding purchase!
Click to expand...

"poor ISO performance in low light" is a gross exaggeration. The GH3 is quite good; far better than any of the other APS-C Canons.

Also - an important point for some: the GH3 is less than half the price of a Mk III. And is smaller. And does 60P.
 
David W. Jones said:
I own both, and the limiting factor with each camera is me.
Click to expand...

+1

Mark 3 and GH3 are both excellent cameras. 5d is better in low light and has less noise, while the GH3 has more resolution and has that amazing 1080p 60fps and also cost a lot less.
Both cameras have their strengths and weaknesses and both can be overcome. GH3 is an MFT mount which you can basically adapt any lens as well as the excellent manual voigtlander lenses that are top notch.

5D is full frame so easier to get wides, awesome in low light and very minimal noise and high iso's


To say one camera is more cinematic than the other is false though, GH3 can achieve shallow dof with fast glass.
Regardless it's all about you as all of these cameras are great.
 
I think it depends on your access to lenses.. esp at the wide end

a cheap 28 or 24 2.8 will give you wide and narrow DOF on the 5d, for the GH you may need a 17 (voigt) or a 12 (slrmagic)

also a 24-70 zoom is a good range on a 5d, maybe less options with the Gh

Camera to camera IMO there is not much in it
 
I see the difference as being a 4 stops advantage on the 5Dmk3 and you have access to cinestyle or other flat profiles on the 5Dmk3. Two stops because the sensor is bigger and two stops lower noise from the camera as a whole. Add to that the cinestyle profile.
 
Regarding the GH3... It looks like a camcorder shot it and that is precisely why I am nervous to purchase the GH3. Granted, I am doing more videoing of family, friends, and some documentary work (run & gun...NYC B Roll, interviews etc) and not narrative per say, I'd still like a visually appealing set of images.
I am still on the fence. I've seen some decent GH2 videos and if money wasn't an option I may have just sprung for the 5D MK III. I could always buy the body and save for other equipment on a slower timeline. Again, I am not doing this for work, but personal use. That doesn't mean I should just buy the cheaper equipment either.

Quality is king, and right now the videos I'm being shown really show the GH3 in a negative light. Hmm.
 
JasonMillard81 said:
I am curious on a few items regarding DSLR and mirrorless video making.


The 5d MK III is amazing in low light but is said to be soft
The GH3 is amazing in sub-800 ISO but is said to be to "home video" feeling for cinematic looks


The resolution and image quality on this GH3 video is stunning: https://vimeo.com/groups/gh3/videos/63349774


But the cinematic feel and hollywood quality of this is equally stunning:
https://vimeo.com/groups/5dmark/videos/49269403


Anyway to get the GH3 to look as cinematic? I'm thinking not if most of, if not all, the videos on Vimeo don't show that? Also What about getting the 5D to sharpen like the GH3? Not possible?


Seems like it's a trade off...


GH3: great sharp image but lack of cinematic feeling and poor ISO performance in low light
5D3: great cinematic feel and ISO performance in low light but not as crystal clear as the GH3


Not sure where to go regarding purchase!
Click to expand...

Nikon D800 + Anti Moire/Aliasing filter and then denoise with Neat and you have a pretty happy medium along with better dynamic range. They use the D800 on Showtime's long running number one series, Dexter, as the b-cam for the Arri Alexa and it's used as the A camera on Wilfred, starring Elijah Wood.

As far as cinematic look. I think grading play a huge part. For me, tones play a huge role in the cinema/film look. I did a simple "Print Screen" of the GH3 video pasted it for editing to see what I could do with it. This is with an online compressed 1280x720 or so screen grab. Here's the original followed by one grade:
 

Attachments

  • GH3-original.jpg
    GH3-original.jpg
    82.7 KB · Views: 0
  • Gh3-graded-2.jpg
    Gh3-graded-2.jpg
    75.8 KB · Views: 0
Wow....I'm amazed a thread like this in DVXuser hasn't turned into a full blown panny vs canon war or a massive 5d bashing thread! :) Great! So much easier to read than those stupid flame wars.

on topic...both are great cameras. GH3 isn't 'home video-y' by any means. I love my 5d3, but both are great cameras and you can't go wrong with either.
 
I haven't shot with the GH3 but I have shot quite a bit with the GH2 & the 5d3. The 5d3 produces wonderful (still) pictures, and the video is quite good, yes a little soft. For the money spent on the 5d3 & one decent lens you could rig up a GH3 & maybe 3 decent lenses to cover your focal lengths plus get some sound too. The 5d3 is nice but big, heavy compared to GH2. GH2 is easier to do "run & gun" with (aka family camcorder) thanks to its AI & continuous auto focus mode - although the 5d3 does have an auto mode it does not continuously focus. The guitar analogy above is pretty good.
 
Check out eoshd and the truth shall be revealed. The guy's pretty much a visionary who knows what he's talking. Lots of intensive tests also.
 
nikon_obsessed said:
Check out eoshd and the truth shall be revealed. The guy's pretty much a visionary who knows what he's talking. Lots of intensive tests also.
Click to expand...

A visionary is quite a stretch. He does have some informative articles here and there, but mostly they are extremely bias and his site has become a commercial for the GH3 and the BMC. He's quick to point out negatives in all other cameras, but only pushes the positives on the GH3 and the BMC (which both have negatives, especially the BMC).

The GH3 clip you showed was quite good. The thing I've never liked about the GH cameras are the skin tones. Even in the video you showed, they just looked a bit plasticy and not sure if got crushed in grading, but the Dynamic range wasn't that impressive.

Canon has a nice image out of the box. It is very stylized and not so realistic a treatment (very red and warm based), so if you like the Canon look you are golden. For me personally, I prefer a realistic look out of the camera and change it to what I want in grading.

If I had to get one, I would get the 5D3, but it is also 2.5x more expensive.
 
Last edited:
I owned several GH2's and have moved to the 5d3, but I shoot about 50/50 stills and video. I'd give the slight nod to the GH2/3 video footage for resolution, but in post I can sharpen up the 5d3 and it gets pretty close. For stills there is just no comparison, and neither for the shallow DOF. Canon wins easily here, and I shot with the Nokton 25mm F/.95 wide open. I was always frustrated with the Panasonic colors/skin tones and while the Canon certainly isn't perfect (needs sharpened in post, no 60p, cannot use the viewfinder in video mode) I'm liking the 5d3 more. Just my .02.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top