Canon's recent announcement. Will it hurt GH1?

Thanks for sharing your views, Nathan. I'm sure we all appreciate them. When you purchase an MKii please do post your work for us to see.
 
Nathan Troutman said:
Sorry to have offended. I am shamed and dishonored.
Click to expand...

No, I was really seriously saying thank you. You haven't offended anyone. You know exactly how things should be done and you're just sharing that with everyone. It should help people.

I think Squig now knows that 35mm Adapters were spawned because of Full Frame capabilities and that Full Frame is the only way to go, or you should just use a Prosumer camera.

I know I had no idea that 35mm Adapters were spawned to use Full Frame. I really thought the P+S Tech was designed specifically to utilize 35mm Cinema Lenses, then later Nikon lenses, but still only covered the Academy FOV. But now it makes sense.

SO like I said, thanks for helping us out. When does your MKii arrive or do you already own one?
 
Does the MKII really have a low light advantage if you have to close down 2 stops to match the DOF of the GH1?
Click to expand...
Good question. I think the difference in the 2 formats in reality is closer to a stop. A 1.8 or 2.8 on a Four Thirds camera doesn't look hugely different than I would expect the same lens to look on a 35mm SLR. Just my subjective view though, I've never tested them side by side.

Four Thirds has always been attacked for low light performance, in the mine is bigger than yours arguments that always seem to crop up. The older cameras were pretty poor, my Oly E300 at 800asa is like taking a picture through a swarm of bees. The G1/GH1 does look way better, but I've seen some banding on some of the low light samples from the GH1. There's a few of these on dpreview. I'm shooting something in August hopefully with my GH1, where I'm planning on using a 5dMKII for some very low light shots, so I'd really like to know the answer to this question.
 
Kholi said:
I think Squig now knows that 35mm Adapters were spawned because of Full Frame capabilities and that Full Frame is the only way to go, or you should just use a Prosumer camera.
Click to expand...

whadutalkinaboutwillis?

Never used one myself but from what I hear they are clunky, soft and dim. I was exploring the option of using a HMC-150 or HV20 with one for the film until the D90 came along.

A whole day has gone by and I'm still in the GH1 camp. C'mon Kholi where's the magic?
 
He deleted his post. You wouldn't understand. LoL

Almost done cutting the action stuff, then vfx mahoozit and sound design.

Soon as it gets done.
 
Kholi said:
You know exactly how things should be done
Click to expand...

OK Kholi I'll bite. I get it - this is DVXuser. This is a Panasonic site. But it's all brand agnostic. In fact Kholi you know exactly how things are done:dankk2:. But I will say your summary earlier in this thread was pretty good and actually fair.

I can't speak to the P+S but the Redrock M2 images FF but the user really determins this depending on how far in they zoom to the ground glass. 35mm adapters were cerated to allow for film-like DOF with small chip video cameras. All that being said there are still plenty of times where film DOF is simply not needed and small chip cameras work just fine.

The idea that less DOF is an advantage of the GH1 over the 5D is confusing to me. squig you made the point that having to stop down on the 5D to get the equivalent DOF of the GH1 would eliminate the low light advantage of the 5D. But with this line of thinking would you also feel that an HVX would have an advantage over the GH1 for the same reason? What?

So I'm guessing you worry about blowing a shot with a full-frame camera like the 5D because of the shallow DOF and think the GH1 will be better because it has less? But unlike with film adapters where you were often forced to shoot wide open because of the slowness of the set-up with these cameras you can determine what kind of DOF you want for the shot. And you don't just have to stop down to accomplish this. Going from a 50mm lens to a 28mm lens will lessen your DOF as well. You have control over how much or how little DOF you want to shoot with. The 5D shoots solid even at 1600ISO. 3200 ISO is still useable as well. And yes the company I work for does actually have a 5DMkii. We've had it since December.

Our reel is here under the video tab.

http://www.hermesparga.com/

The funny thing is Kholi for me most of the good paying work like corporate industrials don't really need any of these cameras or adapters. Nor do they need 24P. It's the indie-films I shoot or the music videos I shoot, etc. that call for the creativity. More often than not these shoots pay little or I do them for free. I don't pretend to shoot major corporate commercial work or big-time music videos - because I wouldn't be shooting them with a GH1 or 5D. So try and get off your high horse.

All of this is funny to me - that you can now be considered big time because you shoot on an HVX. When this all started this whole segment of the video world was looked down upon by the "pro" guys. "You can't shoot good video on that little thing," said the pro guy as he thumbed his nose at the VX-1000.

I started shooting video almost ten years ago. My first camera was a first release VX-2000 and I started editing on Final Cut Pro the original. I remember how "pro" guys laughed at this new camera - until 2 years later everybody was using them. Then all of the sudden you could be considered a pro and be shooting on a PD-150. And now look where we're at. We're all pros now - or at least Kholi is.

I've also lived through plenty of film-induced fads.

The Canon XL1. Wow what a war this was back in the days. If you were a film guy you had to use this camera or you couldn't make a film - or so the XL1 crowd claimed. It has pixel shifting and interchangeable lenses. With the DVX this crowd moved into the Panasonic camp. 24P became the new must have film device. The DVX added some graininess and 24P and the film crowd went crazy.

But I'm not under some delusion that most of the people here are making tons of money off of 24P and the film-look. Most are just like me. Making some money shooting things that don't need 24P or DOF and using that same equipment to try and make their big 20 min short or music video etc. The whole point of the GH1 or 5D is as a replacement for 35mm adapters.

In my time I've seen a few revolutionary products.

The VX1000/VX2000 was the first for me. It created all of this. And Final Cut Pro was part of that - providing desktop non-linear editing at a home price.

Along the way 35mm adapters we're a great innovation.

Red really shook up the whole place.

But in my opinion the Canon 5D is the most revolutionary product I've seen since the VX-1000. It is a complete game-changer.
 
Nathan Troutman said:
OK Kholi I'll bite. I get it - this is DVXuser. This is a Panasonic site. But it's all brand agnostic. In fact Kholi you know exactly how things are done:dankk2:. But I will say your summary earlier in this thread was pretty good and actually fair.

I can't speak to the P+S but the Redrock M2 images FF but the user really determins this depending on how far in they zoom to the ground glass. 35mm adapters were cerated to allow for film-like DOF with small chip video cameras. All that being said there are still plenty of times where film DOF is simply not needed and small chip cameras work just fine.

The idea that less DOF is an advantage of the GH1 over the 5D is confusing to me. squig you made the point that having to stop down on the 5D to get the equivalent DOF of the GH1 would eliminate the low light advantage of the 5D. But with this line of thinking would you also feel that an HVX would have an advantage over the GH1 for the same reason? What?

So I'm guessing you worry about blowing a shot with a full-frame camera like the 5D because of the shallow DOF and think the GH1 will be better because it has less? But unlike with film adapters where you were often forced to shoot wide open because of the slowness of the set-up with these cameras you can determine what kind of DOF you want for the shot. And you don't just have to stop down to accomplish this. Going from a 50mm lens to a 28mm lens will lessen your DOF as well. You have control over how much or how little DOF you want to shoot with. The 5D shoots solid even at 1600ISO. 3200 ISO is still useable as well. And yes the company I work for does actually have a 5DMkii. We've had it since December.

Our reel is here under the video tab.

http://www.hermesparga.com/

The funny thing is Kholi for me most of the good paying work like corporate industrials don't really need any of these cameras or adapters. Nor do they need 24P. It's the indie-films I shoot or the music videos I shoot, etc. that call for the creativity. More often than not these shoots pay little or I do them for free. I don't pretend to shoot major corporate commercial work or big-time music videos - because I wouldn't be shooting them with a GH1 or 5D. So try and get off your high horse.

All of this is funny to me - that you can now be considered big time because you shoot on an HVX. When this all started this whole segment of the video world was looked down upon by the "pro" guys. "You can't shoot good video on that little thing," said the pro guy as he thumbed his nose at the VX-1000.

I started shooting video almost ten years ago. My first camera was a first release VX-2000 and I started editing on Final Cut Pro the original. I remember how "pro" guys laughed at this new camera - until 2 years later everybody was using them. Then all of the sudden you could be considered a pro and be shooting on a PD-150. And now look where we're at. We're all pros now - or at least Kholi is.

I've also lived through plenty of film-induced fads.

The Canon XL1. Wow what a war this was back in the days. If you were a film guy you had to use this camera or you couldn't make a film - or so the XL1 crowd claimed. It has pixel shifting and interchangeable lenses. With the DVX this crowd moved into the Panasonic camp. 24P became the new must have film device. The DVX added some graininess and 24P and the film crowd went crazy.

But I'm not under some delusion that most of the people here are making tons of money off of 24P and the film-look. Most are just like me. Making some money shooting things that don't need 24P or DOF and using that same equipment to try and make their big 20 min short or music video etc. The whole point of the GH1 or 5D is as a replacement for 35mm adapters.

In my time I've seen a few revolutionary products.

The VX1000/VX2000 was the first for me. It created all of this. And Final Cut Pro was part of that - providing desktop non-linear editing at a home price.

Along the way 35mm adapters we're a great innovation.

Red really shook up the whole place.

But in my opinion the Canon 5D is the most revolutionary product I've seen since the VX-1000. It is a complete game-changer.
Click to expand...


=( This is a really long post. When the gist of it is "Preference is not allowed".

Because you haven't actually pressed on anything I've stated as "fact" and you're simply battling my "preference" (see: So I'm guessing you worry about blowing a shot with a full-frame camera like the 5D because of the shallow DOF and think the GH1 will be better because it has less? ). Blow a shot because of hyper shallow DOF? If I wasn't comfortable I wouldn't shoot with it anyway... so, see, you're battling my preference. Not facts. And you can't really battle someone's preference... because we're allowed to prefer what we want? So

... here's the list of Pros and Cons again so that you can skim them and find something to actually debate about.

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1648480&postcount=33

Otherwise, I need to ask you what use is it for you to come into a thread and tell Squig (as flip floppy as it is) that the idea of tryin to achieve a near-to-Academy or S35 DOF and FOV characteristic is silly because You, Nathan, think that Full Frame is Superior.

You can't find a single post where I say "hey you, don't do that". But I know you can find several that clearly state "Hey, this is just how I like to shoot." Or even...

Hey, I just bought an MKii to go along with my GH1.

Again, I'll ask... do you have any MKii samples to show us that'll help?

Love the Brisk Print Ads. S'my favorite Tea.
 
I'm not saying full frame is better than 2x crop or visa versa it all comes down to the look you're after. However 2x crop is closer to 35mm film which is the look filmmakers are trying to get. I've accumulated over a dozen lenses and anamorphic adapters so I'm just trying to figure out the best option for my style of shooting. Ideally you would get both cam's but budgets can't always be stretched that far.
 
Kholi said:
Otherwise, I need to ask you what use is it for you to come into a thread and tell Squig (as flip floppy as it is) that the idea of tryin to achieve a near-to-Academy or S35 DOF and FOV characteristic is silly because You, Nathan, think that Full Frame is Superior.
Click to expand...

The GH1 is not a near-to-Academy or S35 sized sensor. It's a 2X crop factor. S35 is about half way between the GH1 and 5D. I'm not trying to say that it's silly to shoot with a GH1, but it is kind of silly to list less DOF as a reason to use it. I just don't know what to make of that when you can have as much DOF or as little of it as you want with a 5D. It gives you the control to do what you want. I also don't think FF is superior, but FF does give you the more control over DOF.

I haven't bought a camera for myself which is what I'm debating. The 5D is the higher price but it has the best image. I had a lot of hope for the GH1 but the 1080P mode is a bummer for me and I already had a lot of reservations about the 2x format. Y'see when you buy glass it's nice for it to last forever. With FF lenses they will. So if I want an auto lens for the GH1 I'm stuck buying micro 4/3rds lenses. Where on Canon or Nikon I can buy their FF glass and have it forever. So when I change my brain out for a newer one I don't have to change the glass. It's the same reason a Nikon shooter with a DX sensor will still buy a FF Nikon lens. Because FF has been around forever.

I do want to actually shoot some stills with these cameras and going with manual lenses is not much fun. Great to see how hard it was to do back in the day but not fun.
 
Nathan Troutman said:
So if I want an auto lens for the GH1 I'm stuck buying micro 4/3rds lenses. Where on Canon or Nikon I can buy their FF glass and have it forever. So when I change my brain out for a newer one I don't have to change the glass. It's the same reason a Nikon shooter with a DX sensor will still buy a FF Nikon lens. Because FF has been around forever.

I do want to actually shoot some stills with these cameras and going with manual lenses is not much fun. Great to see how hard it was to do back in the day but not fun.
Click to expand...

You're right about that , Nathan. Most of us here are reluctant to delve into the auto 4/3 lenses at the moment but being able to use good glass from a myriad of different manufactures with the simple and cheap adapters available means that said investment in lenses won't go to waste when the next generation of vDSLR hits the market. Lack of auto functions for the olde tyme lenses is a compromise some of us are OK with.
 
Gh1s fov characterisics are close enough to RED I satisfy me. The retail can be corrected by wider glass or moving the camera.
 
the glass options are making me think twice about going back to nikon or to canon. I bought a a c-mount 10mm anamorphic lens that won't mount to anything else.

but then I look at the "sexy model shoot" and think "I gotta get me some of that"
 
Nighthawk said:
Lack of auto functions for the olde tyme lenses is a compromise some of us are OK with.
Click to expand...

And I'm OK with this as well especially when it comes to video. In a way the older manual lenses are nicer because they're metal and more solidly built. I have a Nikon 55mm micro f2.8 that I absolutely love to use whenever I can. But shooting stills with manual lenses is a real pain.

Canon knows if they can get you to buy a Canon body you're going to buy Canon glass and that will make you far more likely to continue to buy Canon bodies and glass down the road. This is the real reason Canon freed the 5D. One of the guys I shoot with is a Nikon guy. The other is a Canon guy. The reason each is one or the other is really because they have a lot of money invested in the glass.

In the end I feel bad for Red because I think they're responsible for this revolution but might not be the one to capitalize on it. That really sucks for them. Without RED I think Sony, Panasonic & Canon would have kept us in their nicely stacked product boxes forever.
 
If the "real" reason why Canon freed the 5Dii was lenses, then why are their plans for the 60D exactly the same as the original 5Dii (no 24P, no manual control)? At least, that's the rumors so far.

Red was a revolution, no doubt. However, after the Red One, Jannard didn't need to announce Red's plans 2 years ahead of release, then change those plans, then change them again, pushing their release date further and further back. I do think this vDSLR revolution will hurt them a bit on the lower end models, but they'll still be OK on the higher end stuff... until Canon & others go after that market.
 
Canon's 5DmkII firware update might only sting the GH1.
Nothing compared to all the pain and anguish Canon's caused people to endure without having manual controls for the past 8 or so months.
But there's plenty of hurt to go around.
Without straying too far from the primary purpose of these cameras, Canon's 5DmkII truly hurts the GH1 is in basic photographic quality. There is not even a debate on this.
Since I know I'm taking photographs as well as HD video, I definitely prefer the 5DmkII.
However, for video features, from camera to stock lens, the GH1 still holds onto a respectable lead. It's simply a better package. Never the less, the image quality that sets these two cameras apart in photography also carries over into the HD video. So, even if Panasonic appears to offer a better package at a great price, the quality of the image doesn't measure up to the 5DmkII, IMO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top