GH1 sample footy and pricing

[Androwski]

Welcome to the boards. But you aren't the first to preach that and you won't be the last. We're all geeks here, and the geeks are what made RED come into fruition. We are a necessary evil.

Thanks for the welcome Kholi! :beer:

That might very well be true, but the question is, if we need all this new technologie (not everything that shines is gold). Technologie is undeniably an important part of our evolution, but in many regards it came to the point where it doesn't really serve us well anymore. This feeling of having to upgrade, to catch up all the time is definitely counterproductive and against our nature, at least for artists who should focus on their creativity. If we use technologie wisely though, while retaining a certain distance to it, then it can help us realize our visions or at least have some real fun. Ok, I should stop philosophizing now. What I actually wanted to say is that speculating about already designed stuff the way it's done here, has absolutely no purpose and nothing to do with product development in my opinion.

Give us a break androw we only just got these toys and they are all broken. if it wasn't for this place and the extensive product development of the members the DSLR's would be completely useless.

Hey Squig, there will always be something broken that needs fixing. It will be that way in 2 years and in 50 years from now. Users report and developers do what they can (or want). Repeating already known issues in a public forum is a waste of time. And limitation can be a good thing. Don't focus on the bad, but on the good and use the weaknesses to your advantage, if possible. That's all I have to say.

 

[squig]

ok master yoda

 

[jamesmallonuk]

Thanks for the welcome Kholi! :beer:

That might very well be true, but the question is, if we need all this new technologie (not everything that shines is gold). Technologie is undeniably an important part of our evolution, but in many regards it came to the point where it doesn't really serve us well anymore. This feeling of having to upgrade, to catch up all the time is definitely counterproductive and against our nature, at least for artists who should focus on their creativity. If we use technologie wisely though, while retaining a certain distance to it, then it can help us realize our visions or at least have some real fun. Ok, I should stop philosophizing now. What I actually wanted to say is that speculating about already designed stuff the way it's done here, has absolutely no purpose and nothing to do with product development in my opinion.



Hey Squig, there will always be something broken that needs fixing. It will be that way in 2 years and in 50 years from now. Users report and developers do what they can (or want). Repeating already known issues in a public forum is a waste of time. And limitation can be a good thing. Don't focus on the bad, but on the good and use the weaknesses to your advantage, if possible. That's all I have to say.

I think your wrong my friend. Ironically I am usually on DVX user arguing that technology shouldn't be our focus, BUT.......the revolution in DSLR for indie/democratic filmaking is probably the biggest step since the Video camera. People have been trying to make that step with adapters for the last couple of years, but only now is it being done properly. RED who is well ahead of the game and being used for possibly one of the last movies you watched at the flicks. Even they are rethinking I believe some of its low cost range in light of these recent developments. Its definitely a revolution, how ever you want to look at it.

 

[DavidNJ]

FYI...there is apparently a clearance on the Korg MR-1s...in case you are looking for an audio recorder to go with your GH-1

 

[Park Edwards]

I'm sorry but I have to say that It was quite obviously a joke, only a teenage girl or maybe a child wouldn't of got that one.


.....hmmmm maybe the GH1 might be for you..........

If you don't understand my sarcasm, you're a genius!

 

[jamesmallonuk]

If you don't understand my sarcasm, you're a genius!

You know what they say about sarcasm....Lowest form of wit!

 

[Kholi]

Thanks for the welcome Kholi! :beer:

That might very well be true, but the question is, if we need all this new technologie (not everything that shines is gold). Technologie is undeniably an important part of our evolution, but in many regards it came to the point where it doesn't really serve us well anymore. This feeling of having to upgrade, to catch up all the time is definitely counterproductive and against our nature, at least for artists who should focus on their creativity. If we use technologie wisely though, while retaining a certain distance to it, then it can help us realize our visions or at least have some real fun. Ok, I should stop philosophizing now. What I actually wanted to say is that speculating about already designed stuff the way it's done here, has absolutely no purpose and nothing to do with product development in my opinion.



Hey Squig, there will always be something broken that needs fixing. It will be that way in 2 years and in 50 years from now. Users report and developers do what they can (or want). Repeating already known issues in a public forum is a waste of time. And limitation can be a good thing. Don't focus on the bad, but on the good and use the weaknesses to your advantage, if possible. That's all I have to say.

I agree with you. Or, I should say the creative mind or half agrees with you. The business mind does not. That's why I'm often going back and forth (very openly) on whether you should be focusing on story or camera. I think because it lives hand in hand now.

It's a never ending battle, though, and you're certainly welcome here to help try to kick all of our asses back to the right side of the fence. The Dark Overlords know I've spent WAY too much time gear-lusting. Oi.

 

[mattsand]

That's why I'm often going back and forth (very openly) on whether you should be focusing on story or camera. I think because it lives hand in hand now.

haven't they always? i've always been extremely conscious about camera, film stocks and so on when i've made films. in my opinion there are two ways of getting it wrong, either by not having a story or by not telling it properly, technology is a huge part of the latter. i'm not saying, as you can probably guess given my previous posts on the subject, that more expensive is better or that more pixels are better, it's just that whatever you choose it's gonna matter. just picking up whatever you happen to own can be a workable strategy but too many people seem to try things with their cameras that just aren't gonna work. if you have a cheap hdv camera it's probably much easier to shoot a gritty urban drama than the next lotr, for example (not that you shouldn't try the latter if you have a good idea on how).

/matt

 

[Kholi]

haven't they always? i've always been extremely conscious about camera, film stocks and so on when i've made films. in my opinion there are two ways of getting it wrong, either by not having a story or by not telling it properly, technology is a huge part of the latter. i'm not saying, as you can probably guess given my previous posts on the subject, that more expensive is better or that more pixels are better, it's just that whatever you choose it's gonna matter. just picking up whatever you happen to own can be a workable strategy but too many people seem to try things with their cameras that just aren't gonna work. if you have a cheap hdv camera it's probably much easier to shoot a gritty urban drama than the next lotr, for example (not that you shouldn't try the latter if you have a good idea on how).

/matt

Yes and no. It wasn't really CAMERA as opposed to Film Stock and Camera Technique. Now it's Film Stock, Camera, Camera Technique. Where the Camera node actually encompasses SEVERAL flavors of Digital Video Acquisition that promise to give you a range of different results. I mean, even D90 to MKii is still a WORLD of difference, you know?

So it's sort'a new. But you know what, Matt? I was just gettin' ready to start that thread... literally right before I read your post.

 

[Park Edwards]

You know what they say about sarcasm....Lowest form of wit!

which seems to be the two things you are lacking.

 

[DavidNJ]

Its amazing how from excitement for the GH1 these threads have moved to waiting for the next Nikon/Canon or Sony/Pentax/Olympus/Samsung camera that may combine a better selection of video components.

 

[Eddy Robinson]

Go for it. The images will be 'interesting'. [...] Makes you want to cry; like your really hot gf gets arrested for bank robbery.

[...]

13.7Mb/s....more tears.

I'm getting really tired of you flogging this particular meme. The bitrate specification is 17Mb/s, the 13.7 you keep quoting is following a conversion to the Apple ProRes 422.

You have 'clarified' with the following statement:

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.

This is obfuscatory. No camera currently records in ProRes; it's an intermediate codec designed for editors which balances speed and high resolution. Yes, it is 13.7 megaBYTES per second; equivalent to 145 megaBITS per second (at normal quality, though a high quality option exists which delivers about 70% greater bitrate).

You say that no SD card could handle this...right. That's because this codec is designed specifically to work off a fast hard disk, whether a an editor's RAID or over a SAN. I think you know this, if only because it has been repeatedly pointed out to you upthread.

You seem to have a degree of technical knowledge. I find it hard to believe you are unaware of the difference between a format like AVCHD (which is designed for minimizing data rates at the expense of requiring high processing power) and ProRes (which is designed for minimising processor overhead at the expense of requiring high bandwidth).

I also find it difficult to believe that you would do direct comparisons of the Canon 5d2 compression with that of the GH1 without taking into account the higher # of FPS, at 24 vs 30.

To be sure, Canon have opted for a lesser degree of compression and a higher price, and I am sure that visually identical shots will look better coming from the Canon than the GH1. The 5d Mk2 is a great camera for many things, even if it doesn't fit the needs of DVX users as much as it might.

But your persistent misrepresentations of what's going on the GH1 suggest either a fundamental misunderstanding of what you're talking about, or an attempt to mislead impressionable readers, which seems to have been partially successful. I call bullshit on your 'analysis'.

 

[Ian-T]

....what Eddy Robinson stated +1

It's time for you DavidNJ to stay quiet until the cam comes out.

 

[Androwski]

ok master yoda

Nah, too young for that!

I think your wrong my friend. Ironically I am usually on DVX user arguing that technology shouldn't be our focus, BUT.......the revolution in DSLR for indie/democratic filmaking is probably the biggest step since the Video camera. People have been trying to make that step with adapters for the last couple of years, but only now is it being done properly. RED who is well ahead of the game and being used for possibly one of the last movies you watched at the flicks. Even they are rethinking I believe some of its low cost range in light of these recent developments. Its definitely a revolution, how ever you want to look at it.

You're right James, there is a revolution going on and I'm not saying I'm against new technology or I wouldn't be using it myself. I just think we don't reeeeally need new cameras as bad as some of you think we do, in order to make better movies, and there's certainly no need to wait for them. It's not what you have, but what you make of it. At this very moment we have everything we need.

It's a never ending battle, though, and you're certainly welcome here to help try to kick all of our asses back to the right side of the fence.

Hehe, I will try! And I'm far from perfect in that regard either, I just thought it's a bit extreme in here, when there are way more important things to get under control first...

 

[DavidNJ]

Well, a 2:3 pulldown on 17.4Mb/s is 13.7Mb/s. The missing frames don't contain information that is used...so...13.7Mb/s. You could use 17.4Mb/s for a 1080p30 equivalence. And those are the frame rates...As for Canon, they do the same recoding in a $350 SX200 and $600 SX1 that they do in the 5DM2. In the case of the SX1, the EXACT same recording.

It is a matter of smart not cost.

Apple spec'd 1080p24 and 720p60 way above those rates in ProResHQ.

However, which Sony, Canon, JVC, or Panasonic consumer camcorders record at 17Mb/s? They are pretty much 21 or 24Mb/s these days.

My problem is I think Panasonic got the rest of the camera right. No DSLR mirror. An 8Mp sensor well suited to video. The only other 'bug' is scanning the sensor too slow in 1080p24 (and not offering 1080p30 or 720p24). Hopefully they will be able to fix the scanning speed problem in software (pretty sure they can) because it also affects the HPX300 and undoubtedly the HPX170/HVX200 successor.

Just bought a Krog MR-1 today (great sale at B&H), so at least I'll have good audio; 1-bit @ 2.8Mhz.

 

[Eddy Robinson]

Its amazing how from excitement for the GH1 these threads have moved to waiting for the next Nikon/Canon or Sony/Pentax/Olympus/Samsung camera that may combine a better selection of video components.

Not as amazing as the blatant inaccuracy of your summary. The latter four brands you mention have barely featured in this discussion - not least because Olympus and Pentax show no sign whatsoever of competing in the video marketplace, and Samsung shows no sign of wishing to break into the prosumer market.

Meanwhile, one participant who changes his mind about which camera he wants every 2 hours (understandable given impending production commitments) is hardly indicative of a trend. The general level of interest seems the same - excitement and some willingness to pre-order, an awareness of potential limitations balanced with optimism about the degree of control on offer.

You seem to be on a mission to talk down this forthcoming camera in any way you can. Why? If it's not the right camera for you, by all means invest in a 5dmk2 or whatever you prefer and sing its praises. It's a fine camera in a lot of ways. Why do you put so much effort in denigrating a different camera with a different set of features at a different price point, to the point of repeatedly citing the bitrate of codecs that?

I can't wait to see what you come up with next...perhaps an explanation of why the 20p on the 500d is a bold move, superior to Panasonic's weak-minded fixation on 24p (in which, acording to you, every 4th frame will be unusable).


I apologize to other readers for going on a rant; I'm just offended by this poster's apparent wish to denigrate rather than discuss the product in question :lipsrseal

 

[DavidNJ]

Samsung showed an APS-C video camera mockup at PMA announced for 2009 availability. Olympus stated they will have a 4/3 or mFT video camera later this year. Canon and Nikon are already in this space. Sony nee Konica/Minolta is trying to match them feature for feature and as a company is rather big in the consumer, prosumer, and professional video space. That leaves Pentax. Once the technology is on the chip, are they going to be the only one left out?

 

[mattsand]

Well, a 2:3 pulldown on 17.4Mb/s is 13.7Mb/s. The missing frames don't contain information that is used...so...13.7Mb/s.

they also contain no motion whatsoever which with an interframe compression scheme means it can be compressed to zero size, which is what compression is, removal of redundancy. things aren't always as obvious as they seem.

/matt

 

[Eddy Robinson]

Well, a 2:3 pulldown on 17.4Mb/s is 13.7Mb/s. The missing frames don't contain information that is used...so...13.7Mb/s. You could use 17.4Mb/s for a 1080p30 equivalence.

Oh yeah. As a software engineer, I would totally waste 20% of my valuable bandwidth by encoding duplicate information in full, rather than providing an offset to the original. As you say, the information in the extra frames will never be used so it makes perfect sense to duplicate it. Because compression is all about retaining as much redundant information as possible.

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1591747&postcount=60

Indeed, many other cameras will come into this space. A few have even been announced, but you seem to be alone in your amazement at how the discussion has shifted to them at the expense of the GH1.

 

[mattsand]

it would be better if the codec was interlace aware though, having every other line change once in a while is a sure way of messing with interframe compression.