1DC: Any 1DC vs GH4 tests out there?
- Thread starter macgregor
- Start date
cookinghusband
Well-known member
At low iso200-880 GH4 is fine, but at higher ISO >1000 IDC is better
Skin tone wise I will say is near enough the standard panasonic vs Canon comparison
Skin tone wise I will say is near enough the standard panasonic vs Canon comparison
marvinhello
Well-known member
Check out James Millers blog, he did a quick comparison between 1D C 4K mode HDMI out and GH4 HDMI out, to me GH4 looks digitally sharper, more contrasty (less DR).
Ebrahim Saadawi
Carbonite Member
Post link please. Didn't know miller had a blog and can't find it
AndreeOnline
Veteran
The GH4 is a nice camera to have access to at that price point. Stepping up to 4k resolution wise will separate the image from many other cameras right there.
But to me the 1Dc is another step up in IQ. It was interesting to see all the other picture profiles, but word to the wise: I don't think you should expect any 12 stops unless you use Canon Log. In Log mode, I feel that Canon uses some version of HTP that under exposes the camera and then lifts the shadows. This is not something you have access to with other custom picture profiles.
marvinhello
Well-known member
Usable Dynamic range on 1D C is 11.5 stops max, there's a test on DVInfo to confirm this, actually all C series camera (C100/C300/C500 intermal) all have the same 11.5 stops usable dynamic range.
Here's a graph that show the data distribution per bit of C-log and S-log.
Someone PMd me about the video -- if you have questions, you can post it here.
Does SLOG3 have 16+ stops of usable DR then?
AndreeOnline
Veteran
That's fine. The actual number isn't that important in relation to what I meant above. Dynamic range is interesting… Depending on who's testing and their agenda, DR can shift one to two stops in favour, or opposite. Take the development of RED Dragon and all the discussions around its DR as a good example. Canon's officially stated number is 12 stops and I typically go with that.
Anyway, what I meant was, in Canon Log mode Canon is doing "something" that isn't available through the normal picture profiles. You need ISO400 to hit IRE100. If you set the camera to ISO200 or 100, regardless of exposure setting and brightness, you'll never get to IRE100—the image gets pulled (to protect highlights) and then boosted back up with the Log profile as long as you use sufficient ISO (ISO400 or above).
It's an interesting graph that kind of illustrates the effects of DR over 8 bit color. I think Canon has done a great job with Canon Log. The axis themselves are a bit unfortunate, as you might come away thinking that Canon Log wastes its maximum tonality (35 stops according to this) just below clipping. That isn't the case of course. In fact, Canon Log starts compressing pretty early into the highlights... at around IRE60 or so. Don't over expose...
It's plain to see that both Slogs were designed for 10 bit space. Canon Log is unique in that it was designed and tested, both numerically and subjectively by projection, to extract the maximum "Log like" performance out of 8 bits. Any effort to expand upon it enters into territory that Canon's designers considered too much of a compromise. Any effort to achieve the same latitude by creating a custom picture profile will be… a struggle (reserving the word 'impossible').
marvinhello
Well-known member
I believe S-Log3 does a stretch to mimic Cineon file, actual dynamic range still remains under 14 stops.