Excessive GH1 FPN?

goodgoings said:
I finally got my GH1 in my hands today. I haven't hacked it yet because I don't have a fast card, but even without it I wanted to see how "bad" the fpn is. I see very little to almost none at 800iso and at 1600iso if it is underexposed, then in certain areas - like in a recessed white wall, but not on the white wall in front. I don't think it is as bad as Matthew's GH1 which is the same serial.

Slight banding at 1600iso at lower right corner.
5366961071_22c579ff39_b.jpg


So my questions - is this acceptable at 1600iso and to people who believe they have a "good enough" GH1 without excessive banding, what is the highest iso you use? Is it 1250iso, or is there anybody going into 1600iso?

I've seen this video where the shooter says he used 1600iso in some places, but not sure where and if the conditions were too perfect where banding wasn't going to rear it's ugly head.
Click to expand...

That's actually pretty good.
 
Because my camera's serial number is similar to Matthew's, I was afraid I might get one with excessive fpn. When underexposing 800iso, I can produce some fpn, but it's not excessive. I think I got somewhat lucky with this one, but I'll have to do some more further testing under several conditions and real world conditions.

mojo, as you mentioned you only shoot up to 800iso, do you still get fpn when you are about 2 stops underexposed?
 
I am not sure since I try to never underexpose. At ISO 800 and a lens at F1.4 I am rarely underexposed. I can check tonight though...
 
The issue is when a subject is properly lit and the surrounding is underexposed. That might create the ugly FPN. Change the film mode to standard to see if it helps.
 
stonebat said:
The issue is when a subject is properly lit and the surrounding is underexposed. That might create the ugly FPN. Change the film mode to standard to see if it helps.
Click to expand...

Yup, used a flashlight as a spot and I've got fpn even at 400iso. It just depends on certain conditions because I shot a 1250iso indoors with the stove light as the only light without any panning and fpn was minimal to none.

I notice I have one horrible violet colored streak on the left side on the LCD when using 100-200iso, it will creep in when exposure is -2 or below. After 400iso and up, the streak will be noticeable when it hits below -1.5. So at the lower iso, the streak shows on the LCD at lower underexposures. Strangely, I then looked at the underexposed clip on the monitor and it's not as violet colored, so it blends in more with the other fpn.

I've read several threads discussing the fpn and Barry_Greens' idea that fpn will kick in at any iso if it is underexposed at least -2.5 to -2.75 seems to be spot on.
 
Last edited:
goodgoings said:
Yup, used a flashlight as a spot and I've got fpn even at 400iso. It just depends on certain conditions because I shot a 1250iso indoors with the stove light as the only light without any panning and fpn was minimal to none.

I notice I have one horrible violet colored streak on the left side on the LCD when using 100-200iso, it will creep in when exposure is -2 or below. After 400iso and up, the streak will be noticeable when it hits below -1.5. So at the lower iso, the streak shows on the LCD at lower underexposures. Strangely, I then looked at the underexposed clip on the monitor and it's not as violet colored, so it blends in more with the other fpn.

I've read several threads discussing the fpn and Barry_Greens' idea that fpn will kick in at any iso if it is underexposed at least -2.5 to -2.75 seems to be spot on.
Click to expand...


Did you do the burn in? Those lines may disappear for good...
 
I've started the burn in, because I have nothing to lose. If my camera didn't have this one prominent line, it probably isn't any different then any other GH1s. As long as the exposure is correct at any iso, the footage is clean.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top