5d or GH3

Ryan Lightbourn said:
We need to avoid camcorder look as much as we can!
Click to expand...

I totally agree, but I don't think any camera is going to be the one solution.

More than camera selection, I think there are other more important factors that contribute to the creation of high quality cinematic looking images. Things like...

- Lens selection
- Shot composition
- Camera movement
- Lighting
- Color grading
- Editing
- Sound design
- Art direction
- Story / Writing
- Actor performance
- Etc...
 
I think people need to wait for different grades of footage to make sure judgments...since the raw has been around for all of a few days. Much of what it will look like depends on grading.....and of course all the other elements, but we're talking pure camera look here. I've seen GH2 footage look more like a very sharp camcorder, and I've seen some GH2 footage that looks very "filmic" for lack of a better word , depending a lot on the choices the artist made.
 
TheDingo said:
I totally agree, but I don't think any camera is going to be the one solution.

More than camera selection, I think there are other more important factors that contribute to the creation of high quality cinematic looking images. Things like...

- Lens selection
- Shot composition
- Camera movement
- Lighting
- Color grading
- Editing
- Sound design
- Art direction
- Story / Writing
- Actor performance
- Etc...
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more.

I know one thing though, after years of heavy Sony/Canon use (took this path: XHA1, EX1, 7D, 5D, FS-100, F3), it wasn't until I invested in Red & raw that I finally felt fully satisfied with most of my images. Something was always missing before.

F3 was the closest I came to that satisfaction with Sony/Canon (mostly due to S-log and the boost in dynamic range). The idea of high dynamic range, raw, and full frame for around $3,500 blows my mind.

I doubt I'll upgrade to Red Dragon...ever...this is simply groundbreaking for us indie filmmakers and will most likely force open doors to better, insanely cheap technology.

At the end of the day, you're right though...considering all of those other factors: an experienced operator can easily make a GH3 look better than an Alexa operated by an amateur. But that experienced operator would create even more impressive images with full frame raw!
 
Ryan Lightbourn said:
But that experienced operator would create even more impressive images with full frame raw!
Click to expand...

What is with the obsession with full frame? In my experience its a pain in the ass for anything other than portraits. DOF is just too shallow. I much prefer S35 or M4/3 but that is just me.

What is it about FF raw over S35 raw that has you so excited? I really want to know.
 
RatLabProductions said:
What is it about FF raw over S35 raw that has you so excited? I really want to know.
Click to expand...

I'm not a huge fan of overly shallow DOF...that can look as cheap as full focus portraits IMO, but you can always stop down.

All of my lenses looked sweeter on my 5DII than my 7D. I have a Red One MX & a Scarlet, and this still has me super excited...the option for incredible lowlight performance and tiny/light form factor are two benefits.
 
aren't most feature films shot on s35 and m4/3? I do admit I enjoy the FF look...having said that...the two vimeo videos I posted look like sharp canons to me but are in fact GH3s...i'm curious how they filmed/processed/graded them to get it like that i'd love to know!
 
Full Frame rocks for still photos, but I've seen several Full Frame videos where I felt like my eyes had gone myopic because everything was close focused with a very blurred background. The lack of DOF was driving me crazy.
 
RatLabProductions said:
What is with the obsession with full frame? In my experience its a pain in the ass for anything other than portraits. DOF is just too shallow. I much prefer S35 or M4/3 but that is just me.
Click to expand...

You could say the same thing about S35 Anamorphic. You get more shallow DOF at the same mm, huge aberrations and way more softness. And still people (especially commercial directors) really like that anamorphic look.

Why wouldn't you like it? It's GREAT!
 
JasonMillard81 said:
aren't most feature films shot on s35 and m4/3?
Click to expand...

s35. But a lot of them are shot anamorphically. What people don't realize is that the dof is different when shot anamorphically. You can get almost Full Frame looking DOF when you s35mm anamorphic. And a lot of films do.

You guys act like m4/3 is good. It's...better than 1/3" that's for sure but I don't think it's that great otherwise. Very hard to control DOF in wideshots with smaller sensors.
 
maarek said:
s35. But a lot of them are shot anamorphically. What people don't realize is that the dof is different when shot anamorphically. You can get almost Full Frame looking DOF when you s35mm anamorphic. And a lot of films do.

You guys act like m4/3 is good. It's...better than 1/3" that's for sure but I don't think it's that great otherwise. Very hard to control DOF in wideshots with smaller sensors.
Click to expand...

So you're saying a 5D would give you closer to film look than a GH3?
 
With a bigger sensor and stopping down your lenses, you'll get a much sharper image with similar DoF.
Definitely if you're compensating that by taking out one stop of ND, but also true if you don't have any more NDs to take out and you increase ISO instead.
All my lenses are a lot sharper on FF than on APS-C, specially in the corners: http://www.similaar.com/foto/lenstestsff/lenstestsff.html
 
Samuel H said:
With a bigger sensor and stopping down your lenses, you'll get a much sharper image with similar DoF.
Click to expand...

In the real world nobody is seeing this. The Canon 5D Mk3 and the Nikon D800 are NOT out-resolving the GH2/GH3 when shooting video, while the GH2/GH3 are sometimes out-resolving the Full Frame sensor cameras.

In theory if the Full Frame sensor cameras were built the same way as the m4/3 cameras, and the Full Frame lenses were built to the same resolution standards as the m4/3 lenses, it would be no contest, the Full Frame would have a huge advantage.
 
maarek said:
You guys act like m4/3 is good. It's...better than 1/3" that's for sure but I don't think it's that great otherwise. Very hard to control DOF in wideshots with smaller sensors.
Click to expand...

Agree to disagree. I don't shoot narrative and through experience have found that M4/3 gives me much more flexibility than the 5DII I used to use.
 
TheDingo said:
In the real world nobody is seeing this. The Canon 5D Mk3 and the Nikon D800 are NOT out-resolving the GH2/GH3 when shooting video, while the GH2/GH3 are sometimes out-resolving the Full Frame sensor cameras.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm surprised you made that claim, Samuel. It's clearly not the case.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top