Firmware update V1.2 (2009-17009)

Thanks for that Barry.

Interesting observations on HDV and DV there too. I remember fondly the red / blue scene issues with my old Panasonic DV cam at university.

The GH1 did indeed puke on my steadicam. It's a shame. Steadicam, lots of fine detail in the scene, plenty of light and movement - it's a no no.

To me this can be a really bad problem. I like to move the camera. I like to shoot outdoors with a wide lens, capturing a lot of detail in the scene.

If you are doing tripod based stuff with a fast lens, like I did with the Shadowplay video then the GH1 can be absolutely stunning.
 
Spike, you should really let me take that camera off your hands before you pop a blood vessel or something. It's not healthy for you to have.

I'm waiting for you down in the marketplace thread..,come and see me, man.
 
To me this can be a really bad problem. I like to move the camera. I like to shoot outdoors with a wide lens, capturing a lot of detail in the scene.

If you are doing tripod based stuff with a fast lens, like I did with the Shadowplay video then the GH1 can be absolutely stunning.
Click to expand...

Yep -- they all have limitations. Infuriating, frustrating, hair-pulling... I mean, for all the complaining I've done, I now have two long-GoP CMOS cameras here (HMC40 and GH1) and I'm waiting for a third (7D).

I hate long-GoP. And I hate CMOS. I don't like having to "know" what my camera can or cannot handle. Say what you want about the res on an HPX170, I know I can put that little bugger in ANY shooting situation and it's going to deliver, every single time. People can boo-hoo about the cost of P2 cards, or the lower definition, or whatever -- but it's gonna get the shot, and it's gonna look great, no matter what. It's got CCDs, it's got an intraframe codec, and a bulletproof recording system. No compromises anywhere but in ultimate sharpness.

The others, you've always got to watch what you're doing, you've got to know what it can handle and what it can't. The HMC150 I've been really happy with, even though it's long-GoP it's never bitten me once, I feel pretty confident with it. I can get sharper pictures out of my HMC40, I can get gorgeous DOF out of my GH1, etc... but you've always got to know when you're going too far, and spot-check...

And before you go buying a 7D, I strongly recommend you try to find someone's 5D and try it out on the steadicam in the forest. I frankly wouldn't be surprised if it suffers from the same issues the GH1 did. Not to quite the same degree, because it does have more bandwidth, but -- it's the same basic thing, an h.264 codec recording without B-frames, so it might not be that much better for freeform steadicam work in a forest with dappled sunlight coming through. Just make sure to stop down a couple of stops on the 5D to equate the DOF with what the 7D would be delivering.
 
It is amazing how so many people complain about the deficiencies of the GH1 when they should worry about how to be more creative with their work and at the same time learn to avoid the situations in which the GH1 will "create" problems for them. If the person knows that shooting in certain places with a lot of camera movement will create artifacts, "mud" and all kinds of problems, for God's sake avoid sooting there. For a really creative cinematographer there wouldn't be a problem coming up with alternatives so at the end of the day he wouldn't have to apologize for his work due to the camera's technical "problems". I know that a camera should really work without problems under any circumstances but unfortunetely this one doesn't and we have to adjust to that until we get one that does. And that is reality. If we can't then we have to go and get a $10k camera that does. For a consumer camera costing $1500 the GH1 is a great pro camera if the person behind it is not a regular consumer but a real pro. There is plenty of excellent work out there done on 1080p that looks fantastic and there is also plenty of work that looks like crap. And that is both content wise as well as camera wise. That goes to prove that despite the GH1 limitations the right person can be very creative and produce high quality and professional output.
 
But that's the point -- people have to educate themselves as to what those scenarios/locations are. And until they do, they run the risk of being burnt by the camera not handling the situation well.

It is unfortunate that the industry has come to this; prior to HDV we had absolutely reliable cameras/workflow and any camera could be taken into any environment and expected to just-plain-work. But then along came long-GoP, and then CMOS, and pixel-skipping chips that cause aliasing and moire, and so now we have to be ever-vigilant as to where we're shooting and what we're shooting, to make sure the recorder is able to handle it.
 
Barry_Green said:
It is unfortunate that the industry has come to this; prior to HDV we had absolutely reliable cameras/workflow and any camera could be taken into any environment and expected to just-plain-work. But then along came long-GoP, and then CMOS, and pixel-skipping chips that cause aliasing and moire, and so now we have to be ever-vigilant as to where we're shooting and what we're shooting, to make sure the recorder is able to handle it.
Click to expand...

John Caballero said:
It is amazing how so many people complain about the deficiencies of the GH1 when they should worry about how to be more creative with their work and at the same time learn to avoid the situations in which the GH1 will "create" problems for them.
Click to expand...

Sometimes I have sat back and become aggravated about people moaning about mud and banding, thinking - oh come on, it doesn't stop you making good stuff.

And thats true, it doesn't. But on the flip side, there are some major issues with modern video cameras that I don't like and I want to see fixed.

Still, I have a separation in my mind between the technical stuff and the creative stuff. So when I talk about mud, it has nothing to do with creativity and I don't appreciate people saying 'shut up and film'. One isn't related to the other and mud doesn't stop people from filming but it's worth debating from a technical point of view, because it's interesting.

It is just about highlighting the problem and knowing more about it, and hopefully pressuring a firmware update out of Panasonic. But obviously, they don't see fit to fix it or cannot fix it... whatever the reason.
 
I made my decision based on Philip Bloom's sample videos and common sense.
Click to expand...

My concern is that when I was following the singer around a tree in a music video, and I got the footage back, I had plenty of mud, artefacts and lost detail despite the footage being well shot and a steadicam used.
Click to expand...

I think that's the nub of the matter. Mr Bloom's footage, as I recall it, did not involve anything remotely like following a singer round a tree, and indeed, it was very careful to avoid anything which would trip up the codec. On the other hand, my purchasing decision was based on seeing vimeo shots which were examples very close to the kind of shots I wanted to take. Consequently I am very satisfied with what I'm getting.

I'm also very satisfied, unlike the good commander, because I'm probably far more like Panasonic's target customer than he is. He's not where the money lies (in terms of bulk of sales) - I am. It's more important, commercially, for Panasonic to please me with the GH1 rather than him. My route to the GH1 started out with some kind of Canon Hi8 camcorder, then the Canon A2Hi (both literally consigned to the dustbin last week), then the Sony VX9000, then a couple of Digital8 camcorders, and then the Panasonic SD5 (not so long ago really). The GH1 is so far ahead of all of these (for my purposes, note) that they really shouldn't be mentioned in the same post.

Perhaps devices like the GH1 are starting to show up the limitations of the AVCHD codec. In earlier equipment, other aspects of the devices were the weakest link in the chain. Now the spotlight is being thrown on the codec itself due to the quality of the images passed to it for processing. In many other forums I've read, AVCHD seems from the outset to have been regarded as unsuitable for serious videography, full stop. Perhaps we are seeing that chicken come home to roost.

Personally I think the last firmware update made very worthwhile improvements to the OIS and if this one gives some bonus improvement to autofocus, well, thank you Panasonic. I didn't expect either.
 
Quick question...

I never installed the first revision firmware on the camera...so what is the correct way of upgrading firmaware. Can I by pass the first revision and straight install the second or I have to do it in order?
 
I dont know that this is a combined update just do it in order can't go wrong...don't mess around with things like firmware.
 
It looks like you can't now download the previous version, which would imply that the new version incorporates the first update too (which is usually the case with firmware unless they warn you otherwise). The update site simply says you need to update if the firmware you have is older than the firmware on offer, and also there can be problems updating lenses unless the body firmware is current.
 
I agree with Barry's statement that the GH1 is not capable of delivering a better codec. For a camera that weights less than 1000g with a lens, comparing with a RED ONE that is about 10 times heavier, there is not enough processing power to encode a better image coming from a similar sized sensor (12Mpx).
But the issue of crippling the cameras in firmware is a pet hate of mine for a long time.:

1. Just have a look at side by side comparison of of Canon A650 and the G9 (sold at twice the price): same chip and lens in a different body... a firmware hack of the 650 put it way beyond the G9 capabilities.
2. The 5D was finally 'enabled' to shoot in manual mode after about one year of people screaming and kicking around the forums.
3. A firmware 'upgrade' by Panasonic disabled the use of third party batteries on GH1. Now Panasonic can sell a lot of batteries that cost 4x more that the generic crowd (which are still making a tidy profit selling those 'cheapo' batteries made with same cells as the branded one). Do they protect the bottom line with a firmware change?
 
Since I am brand new here I'll apologize if this has been discussed or discredited before.
Would it be reasonable to believe that the reason for having a 17Mb/sec codec is to support the lowest common denominator for SDHC cards? Class 2 SDHC cards have a sustained write speed just above 2MB a sec, which is very close in the ball park of 17Mbits (2.125MB to be exact).

It seems to me that, because it is a DSLR'esque camera which still intended for still photography and not what many users are shoehorning them to do as Barry suggested, Panasonic is probably more concerned that its camera will be able to function with what ever SDHC card its owner slaps in it.
To raise the codec's bitrate to 24 per say as some have suggested, would mean a minimum requirement for video would be a class 4 or higher SDHC card. Which for any tech savy user may not be an issue at all. But I am sure there would be people out there who bought a class 2 unknowingly, and wonder why their camera won't shoot video.

Thats been the one thing that has bugged me about any vDSLR that uses SD cards, is that data rate bandwith bottleneck it has compared to a compact flash card that can write up to 45MB a sec, which is why the 7D can handle such a higher data rate.
It will definitely be interesting when SDXC becomes more mainstream 104-300Mb a second anyone?
 
I've now had a chance to look at Commanderspike's vimeo link and to be honest, all the way through I'm seeing what I personally would describe as typical AVCHD shortcomings when it comes to foliage and grass - though not in particular at the 50" point he mentioned. It's in line with my personal expectations of a device at this price point.

Now that's if I don't watch the young lady at all, just concentrate on the background, which is not the intent of the production of course.

However, it does appear to be a bit of a suicide mission in terms of what AVCHD in general and the GH1 in particular can do in some outdoor situations.
 
Hi Greg: In the GH1 user manual Panasonic strongly recommends using a Class 6 or higher SDHC card for HD video recording. Slower-speed cards can work in certain cases, but Class 6 is what they recommend.
 
stephenmick said:
All due respect to Mr. Bloom, but I have a GH1, and I do use it for pro work (as in work for clients who actually pay me).

I agree a bump in the codec performance would be welcome, but I have yet to see a shot from my GH1 with "mud" that would cause a shot to be unusable.
Click to expand...

Yup, I agree. I'm in the same boat.

I must make a little rant, not directed at anyone... just letting off some very well intentioned steam.

I love the camera and to be honest, I feel my skills are far inferior to the amazing potential this camera possesses. I think many people who complain so bitterly about mud and codecs should really work on their shooting techniques, as personally... my eye catches a bad composition, poor lighting, bad editinmg or a cheesy concept way quicker than I would detect stray artifacts.

I bought into this whole "critique and comparison of cameras" which proved to be very useful and lead me to choose the Gh1. But now that I have it, I love it... no complaints. Just workarounds. This camera will be put to work, and will no doubt afford me the next generation of video SLR's within a year. Hopefully by that time, my skills will merit an upgrade. I think many of you put more focus into the "tools" of the trade than into the "skills" of the trade.

If you do have bitter complaints about this camera, either you

a) require a dedicated rugged camcorder, perhaps with a letus which can do the job... or
b) you are so immensely talented that you should be spending far more on the tools of your trade.

Either case the Gh1 isn't for you.

But the GH1 is PERFECT for me... and I cant wait to document and show off my progress.
 
themartist said:
... my eye catches a bad composition, poor lighting, bad editinmg or a cheesy concept way quicker than I would detect stray artifacts.
Click to expand...

Agreed - I'm not saying we should blindly accept any cameras limitations as just the way things are... but I will say this - I've never once noticed "mud" or aliasing or artifacts in any video that hadn't already lost my interest.

The pieces I've seen that are engaging keep my interest, and my eye, on what's important - the content.
It may just be me... but in my opinion, if I'm noticing technical flaws in the codec in a piece, then the filmmaker did something wrong well before the camera did.
 
Yeah, it's just a matter of working within it's limitations. Thanks to the back and forth in these forums I've taken what I've learned to understand what can't be changed at this moment as far as the GH1's shortcomings. Yes, in my shoot I do have some 'mud'. In some cases I do have some banding but these were where I expected them and I've minimized them to the best of my ability. The good thing about the forums is that it lessens the one thing none of us want on any shoot; surprises. If I fired this puppy up on set for the first time and not followed the depth of discussion here before hand I'd be tearing my hair out and shouting 'WTF' over and over. I'm into week 3 of shooting and any problem I've had with the footage wasn't the camera's fault; it was mine. Mind you I still blame the DP.
 
themartist said:
... and will no doubt afford me the next generation of video SLR's within a year.
Click to expand...

Exactly. My camera has already paid for itself (and me) at least 3x over already. As long as I can use my lenses on the next generation I've already felt the money was well spent and can't wait for what the future may have in store.
 
commanderspike said:
To buy a top end Panasonic camera and a top end Panasonic camcorder would cost a lot more than just buying ONE GH1.

Panasonic have proved with the GH1 that to (nearly) make the camera indie film makers dream about, does not cost a lot with modern technology. But I will bet my house on the pro version being marked up considerably. Because they can, and they will.
Click to expand...

And I hope the 'pro' version would be marked up.

I don't want my business destroyed by indie film makers doing things too cheaply for the sake of their ideas/profit. Indie film makers have never had it so good anyway.

I like the fact that my hard work and determination has made me enough money to buy the expensive version so I can charge more.

I say bring on the more expensive pro version. Cheap is very rarely good anyway (I ain't too happy the GH1 body is Chinese, when the rest of the Panasonic stuff admittedly broadcast is made in Japan where costs are higher and the workforce is better treated). You want cheap - you accept the compromises of the GH1.

Thing is there were plenty of warning signs of what the camera could do before it went mainstream, I bought one knowing how it looked -why did you buy it? The evidence was out there. (I bought it because I wanted compact DSLR long-lens stills camera that could turn its hand to big sensor video for the occasional holiday.)
 
Last edited:
2 versions of a firmware...somebody is going to hack it. we were surprised when someone hacked the 5d, so maybe something will come from the gh1 too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top