GH1 sample footy and pricing

The picture you posted is transcoded to prores and that's megabytes, not bits. That final cut image you posted says nothing about the source file before it was changed, I get the same thing in fcp transcoding hmc150 21mb vbr clips. It's a prores thing.
 
No, just assume DavidNJ is frustrated with both Canon and Panasonic. I figure Canon's still camera people didn't realize what they built...'Doctor, its ALIVE!!!" Who knows what their video people have cooking. The Rebel is a low end camera and just happened to be next. That leaves the 50D in an awkward spot. Just analyzing their marketing more then their technology.

As far as the quality of the image the high bandwidth recording is an enabler; 720p30 at 25Mb/s and 1080p30 at 45Mb/s, both H.264, are new levels none of the AVC video cameras match...accept maybe AVC Intra.

However, it also seems clear that the sensor is also better. Very low noise even in low light situations: http://www.vimeo.com/2764864, http://www.vimeo.com/2977346.

The only problem is Canon didn't think people needed control in video mode.

Panasonic may have matched or exceeded the Canons with the signal coming out of the sensor and image processing. They knew what the video people wanted and gave manual control, and auto control. Stereo mic.

Then they threw it away on recording. VERY disappointing. They didn't have to go far to know that was wrong. Sony made a big deal of going from 17 to 21 Mb/s. Canon from 17 to 21 to 24. Even Panasonic went from 17 to 21. If that was the big thing, why did they go 13.7 and 17? Very disappointing.
 
DavidNJ said:
The Rebel is inexpensive, and its 720p30 images will probably blow away any camera near its price, especially if you put better glass on it..

1080p24 over 60i is 13.7, as shown in this picture posted by Steve Mullen of his PMA clips. I have little hopes for its on camera recording. The Canon's 720p30 should dust it. The 50D Mark II should really dust it with 1080p30. Then there is the 5D Mark IIa. The GH-1 reminds me of a trial photo editing software package that won't let you save the file.

11135d1236316136-gh1-720p59-94-1080p24-modes-picture-7.jpg
Click to expand...

fook 13.7! even crappy camcorders do 17. I have a film to shoot in July! Now this is pissing me off! Surely the GH1 will look better than the D90. I don't want a super clean video look.....just not a crappy compressed look

mark IIa?
 
squig said:
fook 13.7! even crappy camcorders do 17. I have a film to shoot in July! Now this is pissing me off! Surely the GH1 will look better than the D90. I don't want a super clean video look.....just not a crappy compressed look

mark IIa?
Click to expand...

These are megabytes and not megabits and it is the data rate of the apple pro res codec and not the bitrate of the GH1's avchd compression

GH1 AVCHD is 17 Mbps


Gary
 
I got worked up in such a frenzy I didn't even notice...thanks i feel a bit better now. I can probably live with 17 for now just...I don't really have a choice.
 
That may say "MB" but it is megabits. 13.7 MB would be over 100Mb/s and require a x133 CF...no SDHC need apply. The 720p60 says 17.4MB, I don't think it is 140Mb/s.

If you only want to record to the camera, the T1i at 720p30, the 50D Mark II and the 5D Mark IIa at 1080p30 would have better images. If you can and do capture from HDMI to a high quality recorder then the GH-1 should shine...glow in the dark.
 
squig said:
fook 13.7Now this is pissing me off! Surely the GH1 will look better than the D90. I don't want a super clean video look.....just not a crappy compressed look

mark IIa?
Click to expand...

Agreed.

The GH1 better not be just video. For all intents and purposes, it has the same amount of mega pixels as Red does, and if we take Red footage down from 4K to 1080P 24 AVC codec ( or what ever ) this is
what the GH1 should look like. However if they screw it up like Canon does? Then No it won't. If I want HDvideo, I would get the HMC150..
 
PappasArts said:
Agreed.

The GH1 better not be just video. For all intents and purposes, it has the same amount of mega pixels as Red does, and if we take Red footage down from 4K to 1080P 24 AVC codec ( or what ever ) this is
what the GH1 should look like. However if they screw it up like Canon does? Then No it won't. If I want HDvideo, I would get the HMC150..
Click to expand...


I would guess the anti-aliasing / de-bayering / sub-sampling / re-sampling . . . whatever the hell they use to reduce the sensor data to 1080p on the GH1 will be closer to the D90/5D2 rather than the RED stuff.

This is all speculation on my part, but arguably I think the GH1 will still be subject to aliasing issues whereas the RED camera will not.
 
Lee Wilson said:
There is some fantastic looking HV20 stuff, I have even put HV10 to 35mm film and it looked fantastic (after lots of grading).
Click to expand...

camcorderinfo.com has some detailed reviews of the HV's and the newer AVCHD based panny and canon camcorders. They've found the panny's to be a bit softer than the canon's but far better than the D90.

If I can get HV20 detail with D90 shallow depth of field, dynamic range, and low light capability out of the GH1 I'll be satisfied. I'm not going to be looking for every artifact and crying over it, I've got a story to tell. And if it makes some money then I can get a red and jerk off.
 
Lee Wilson said:
There is some fantastic looking HV20 stuff, I have even put HV10 to 35mm film and it looked fantastic (after lots of grading).
Click to expand...


When looking at quality I suggest looking at two things:


  1. The sharpness of major object WITHOUT edge sharpening. You need to do a blow up to see edge sharpening. The HPX-300 of the dog leash shows heavy sharpening below.

    1237767545.jpg
  2. Texture detail....this is where the 5DM2 shines. Look at skin, fur, hair and beards. Not just that you can see a hair, how crisp is it. Nearly all HD cameras lose a lot of detail from compression and low pass optical filters. The RED One and SK2k don't.
 
David you seem to want to analyze the sh*t out of stuff, but is Joe Popcorn going to look at the screen and say "ohh duuude, did you see those chroma artifacts, that just ruined the whole movie for me!" am i wrong or is the majority of the guys who're on here looking to make indie films with these camera's and not commercial work?
 
I'm all for critical analysis but it gets to a point where you have to say fook it grab a camera and make a movie. So maybe the first feature is a bit low res...who gives a shi*? The second film certainly won't be.
 
Amazing. Is like the bind leading the blind. We don't know squat about the new Canon or Panasonic offerings. We can't make desicions or judgements on neither. In the meantime we know that if you need to shoot professional stuff in the near future you can't go bellow the HVX 200, HPX 170, HMC 150 or any comparable camera at their price points. You will get nice stuff with less but it ain't professional. Neither is the D90.
 
And then someone else is replying to your post saying, If you shoot professional you can't go below RED/35mm/16mm/ or any comparable camera at their price points. You will get nice stuff with less, but it ain't professional. Neither is the Hvx200.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top