Bitrate?

Ah yes... I'd seen this commercial before. And yes, you can still see where the codec fails (just like the 5D) during motion. But you do have to be looking for it. Not saying it's bad or objectionable. But it's there.
 
But that's why I was considering the GH-1, my style is not fast at all. A lot of slow pans, slow tracking shots, static shots. I don't really do hand held stuff anymore.

Honestly, I don't even really care if the image isn't as good as the HVX200 or HMC40. THe only worry I had was seeing those ugly motion frames that were just muddy pixels. Is that a result of subject movement or camera movement? If I have a static shot of a car driving by, will that happen? Or does it tend to happen when the camera moves?

I was even considering getting the hv40 too, if that gives you an idea of where I'm at. I'm not interested in getting the film look. I like how 24p looks but I have no shame in my stuff looking like HD video, I sort of embrace it. But I also like the DVX because the manual features are nice and I like learning and having control over my image. I know both the hv40 and gh-1 compromise in manual control, but the hv40 compromises a little too much.

(Also, separate sound system doesn't bother me too much).


My main concern is if I can buy the GH-1, use my shooting style, and get a nice image that would theoretically look good blown up on film (good as in not just a mess of muddy artifacts). If the main problem is shooting handheld or rapid movements, then it's not even a problem for me.
 
No one here is going to talk you out of what you already have your heart set on. So buy the camera and enjoy it. Stop worrying about what we think.
 
I have seen the GH1 1080p footage projected on a massive screen using a christie projector and it was stunning. BUT, you had better keep the limitations in mind because when it DOES break down with mush or jello - it is absolutely 5 times worse on a big screen.
 
PerroneFord said:
The thing for me, is that for a few hundred more, the 7D just brings so much more to the game, it's hard not to seriously consider it.

If I had to shoot a feature with a $2k camera, and I could take my time, that would be my first choice right now.
Click to expand...

I almost went for the 7D. The thing that pulled me to the GH-1 side was the $1300 for both body and lens, and so, I could get a Zoom H4n for audio, for about the same price as just the 7D body alone...

To date, with the tests I've done, I don't have too much of a problem with the GH-1 compression.

Oh, yeah, and because Burning Man tickets went on sale... the Zoom purchase has been 'deferred'... but I still have my trusty DVX100...
 
PerroneFord said:
Everyone want's to believe that a $1500 camera can do what a $10k camera can do or a $100k camera can do.
Click to expand...

Nah, I'm just trying to catch up with the guys who used a wind up Bolex...

But, for me the comparison is not a $10K or $100K camera, but is it better than the HMC150, or HMC40, for what I want to do, given the price differences.

Based on my brief encounter with the HMC150 last year, and the GH-1 that I now have, I'm at the moment satisfied with the GH-1, despite several significant differences... like, ok, i don't get real time pre-compression output... but then I don't have the money for a good digitizer... so that option is less than useful. Sure the scope display would help getting the settings for the shot nailed... but the GH-1 does have at least a histogram display, that I am use to from the still digital world...

And like I've said, the audio issue I was thinking about using a dual system anyway, so, the GH-1 does sort of 'strongly' encourage that direction.
 
Not to repeat myself, but I guess my last question is does "pushing the codec" come down to a lot of different variables, or is it just when moving the camera about quickly? If I use slow movements, is mud and jello still liable to pop up?
 
MeAgain said:
Not to repeat myself, but I guess my last question is does "pushing the codec" come down to a lot of different variables, or is it just when moving the camera about quickly? If I use slow movements, is mud and jello still liable to pop up?
Click to expand...


Yes, "jello" is less likely to affect you with slow movements , or at least is less visible

Yes, "pushing the codec" comes down to a lot of variables. When you shoot things that have high scene complexity (this would include things with a lot of motion, or high detail like grass fields, forests, waterfalls, moving subjects, or even camera moves) , this leads to relative overcompression (relative to the bitrate and codec compression - which is low for both in this camera), and details will be smeared out => mud. Conversely, something like a still interview of a person talking is relatively low complexity content, so you should be fine in those scenarios.
 
MeAgain said:
Not to repeat myself, but I guess my last question is does "pushing the codec" come down to a lot of different variables...
Click to expand...

Yes, it does. Point the camera at a scene with a high level of detail... and allow it to move.. codec breaks. Could be as simple as a hand strumming a guitar, or a squirrel in a tree. Grass swaying in the breeze or a bird in flght. There's all kinds of variables out there. Maybe some of the break the codec, maybe some don't. There is no definitive answer.

For me, buying a camera with good glass and a good sensor is ok, if I take a bet on the in-camera codec and it comes up short, I can attach an external recorder. But the GH1 locks you out of that option. Other cameras don't.

It's a crapshoot. How lucky do you feel?
 
Well, that fully answers my question then, and I thank you.

PS: Not lucky enough to throw 1200 bucks away....
 
I have a question about what PerroneFord said about the Canon 7D and other video DSLRs.
He mentions that the 7D can bypass the codec (viaHDMI, I suppose) to an external recorder. I don't think this is true. Or at least, from what I've read, it is not a full resolution image but rather a downrezzed SD image.
As far as I know, no DSLR has live output from HDMI when recording at full 720 or 1080 resolution. If this were the case, then everyone would be using them with a Aja Ki or something to bypass the codec. To my knowledge, nobody is doing this. Therefore, I think the claim that the GH1 is inferior because it can't do this is not valid because no DSLR can do this.
Can anyone confirm or deny this notion?
 
Also, regarding the idea that the Canon 7D is better because it has a larger sensor, I suppose in some ways that may be true because of slightly better low light performance. But only slightly. Recent tests show that the 7D and the 5D rate their ISO lower than the GH1, so that if you compare their ACTUAL ISO's, the noise level is almost the same. Under 800 ISO, it IS the same.
The Canon 7D's larger sensor will give you a slightly shallower depth-of-field, but really not much. When you compare the size of GH1's 4/3 sensor with the Canon's APS-C sensor, it's not much difference. Personally, I prefer the 4/3 sensor because when I shoot at say, f2 on one of my primes, it's the same as shooting about f2.4 or 2.8 on 35mm film, which is what many Director's of Photography shoot at. They don't always shoot with the apertures wide open. So, in my opinion, I can more easily replicate the depth-of-field of hollywood movies, but have an extra stop of light to work with because I'm open one stop more!
 
dvbrother said:
I have a question about what PerroneFord said about the Canon 7D and other video DSLRs.
He mentions that the 7D can bypass the codec (viaHDMI, I suppose) to an external recorder. I don't think this is true. Or at least, from what I've read, it is not a full resolution image but rather a downrezzed SD image.
As far as I know, no DSLR has live output from HDMI when recording at full 720 or 1080 resolution. If this were the case, then everyone would be using them with a Aja Ki or something to bypass the codec. To my knowledge, nobody is doing this. Therefore, I think the claim that the GH1 is inferior because it can't do this is not valid because no DSLR can do this.
Can anyone confirm or deny this notion?
Click to expand...

I was under the impression for the longest time that the 7D does NOT output HD while recording, just like the 5D. Then I was sharply corrected on this last week. Your question here prompted me to do some digging. And the answer is ... well sorta both.

Yes, the HDMI out while recording DOES appear to be HD. That's the good news. The Bad news is that it appears to include the red recording dot. So until the Magic Lantern software gets up to speed, this is just not a viable recording scenario. However, it shows a lot of promise in that it *IS* putting the signal there, so a firmware update from Canon or a hack, should be able to resolve the problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top