GH1 vs Canon MkII

Barry_Green said:
By "upping" I am going to assume you mean using a shorter shutter speed... shorter shutters = less motion blur and less light reaching the sensor. So when you use shorter shutter speeds you get darker footage and more "stuttery" footage.

I really don't get why so many folks are shooting with crazy high shutter speeds. I mean, just -- don't. Please. glue the shutter on 1/60 (for USA shooters, 1/50 for PAL shooters) and leave it there. Don't go using the shutter speed to change exposure; use neutral density filters instead. Changing the shutter speed makes the motion more "staccato" and renders motion unnaturally.

The one exception for general use is if you're going to use 720/60p for slow-mo; in that case you'd want to use 1/120 (USA) or 1/100 (for 720/50P PAL users).
Click to expand...

Barry, I hope you know how much respect we all have for you. With that, I have to respectfully say that I don't know if I agree 100% with all of what you said. I will say first, that I have only been doing video for about 8 months, so I know I still have a lot to learn.

Does this video I did look look jittery or unpleasing to you?
http://www.vimeo.com/5027327

That was shot 720/60p and 1/2000th shutter because I stuck it on a 24p timeline and slowed to 40% (faux overcrank). I think that available light (for me) is what determines the shutter speed. Maybe this is all just a personal preference thing. I would rather have really crisp footage for slowmo. I don't like the blur of typical slow motion like taking 60p and just slowing it down 50%.

This is another example
http://www.vimeo.com/4453515

That was a mix of 24p/60p on a 24p timeline. 60p was shot at 1/1000th. I wasn't real happy with the upload quality, but I was pleased with the video.

My point is just that for the "overcranked" slowmo look, I think the higher shutter speeds are cleaner and more appealing to me.
 
It's not just the sticker price that makes the MKII a far more expensive option you also have to consider the cost of external monitoring and stabilization.

If nikon get the D300s right it will be the low light king, question marks remain about jello and manual controls. The rumor mill suggests it will be announced on August 3rd so I'd hold off on buying anything until then.
 
squig said:
It's not just the sticker price that makes the MKII a far more expensive option you also have to consider the cost of external monitoring and stabilization.

If nikon get the D300s right it will be the low light king, question marks remain about jello and manual controls. The rumor mill suggests it will be announced on August 3rd so I'd hold off on buying anything until then.
Click to expand...

squig, what are the specs on this camera? 24 p? full manual?

I dont have a gh1 , and my credit card had not been charged, so Im game
for anything!
 
nobody knows the full specs but 24p is probably a certainty. It could be a MKII GH1 killer or it could be as lame as the D90. It might not even be announced in 2 weeks but most nikon watchers think it will be. It's rumored to have H.264 compression like the MKII and 1080p 24p. Nobody has any info on manual control but it would be surprising if it didn't have it. The big question is whether Nikon have been able to improve on the rolling shutter and overheating. There are some possible specs at nikonrumors.com
 
wow , thanks.

sure sounds promising.

the only thing I might not like is the larger size body, but if the codecs better than GH1 it will be a HARD call for sure!
 
J Davis said

- yes, I was a big fan of the first Crank

I note you said FIRST.

Yeah, I got a real kick out of that first one,

Saw Beginning of SECOND, and I didnt like at all. I walked out in fact!

{ in fact I honestly pity society for those that liked the second one! }
 
commanderspike said:
With 30p being the only option in the 5D I don't believe that causes trouble for PAL users.
Click to expand...
It is troublesome if you want to mix the footage of the 5D with other PAL footage which is either 720p/50 or 720p/25. If you can afford to go with 30fps for everything it might not be much of an issue.

commanderspike said:
PS - mud in 720p AVCHD = yes, rarely. Mud in 720p MJPEG = never.
Click to expand...
Yes I know that it only occurs in AVCHD footage as it is a compression issue.

mikeydvx said:
There is no mud in 720p footage.
Click to expand...
Oh boy, why should I made such a claim without having seen any mud in actual footage? Actually I don't want this topic to turn into a mud topic again, but saying that there is no mud in 720p is simply not true and we want to get the facts straight, right?

Look at this and now tell me it's not there:

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • 720p_mud.jpg
    720p_mud.jpg
    115.8 KB · Views: 0
holy lord the red is a nice camera. second clip kind of is not very entertaining/good (dont like the lighting) but the skate video is incredible looking
 
Brad_C said:
Does this video I did look look jittery or unpleasing to you?
http://www.vimeo.com/5027327

That was shot 720/60p and 1/2000th shutter because I stuck it on a 24p timeline and slowed to 40% (faux overcrank). I think that available light (for me) is what determines the shutter speed. Maybe this is all just a personal preference thing. I would rather have really crisp footage for slowmo. I don't like the blur of typical slow motion like taking 60p and just slowing it down 50%.
.
Click to expand...
They both looked nice and clear. But the fact is they both do look jittery (especially the skateboard video). Matter of fact you can see what resembles 24p with pulldown not removed type of ghosting . This is typical with fast shutter speeds (1/250 and above). The best way to get silky smooth slow motion is by using a 180 degree shutter. SO if you are using 60p then 1/120 shutter gets rid of all motion blur and becomes sharper (for 120p then 1/240 etc.). Sure, the higher you go the cleaner or sharper it appears...but the motion takes a different turn. Basically it looks like a "Saving Private Ryan" look but slowed down. If that's the effect you are looking for then cool....but it's not buttery smooth slow motion.
 
Ian-T said:
They both looked nice and clear. But the fact is they both do look jittery (especially the skateboard video). Matter of fact you can see what resembles 24p with pulldown not removed type of ghosting . This is typical with fast shutter speeds (1/250 and above). The best way to get silky smooth slow motion is by using a 180 degree shutter. SO if you are using 60p then 1/120 shutter gets rid of all motion blur and becomes sharper (for 120p then 1/240 etc.). Sure, the higher you go the cleaner or sharper it appears...but the motion takes a different turn. Basically it looks like a "Saving Private Ryan" look but slowed down. If that's the effect you are looking for then cool....but it's not buttery smooth slow motion.
Click to expand...
I have no clue what kind of ghosting you are talking about, but I totally agree to what Brad is saying. When going slow-mo go with the highest shutter you can have. Motion blur just doesn't look good with slow motion.

Here is another example:
http://www.vimeo.com/2384547

So where is the ghosting?
 
pailes said:
Oh boy, why should I made such a claim without having seen any mud in actual footage? Actually I don't want this topic to turn into a mud topic again, but saying that there is no mud in 720p is simply not true and we want to get the facts straight, right?
Click to expand...

You'd have to know the context of that shot. Was that shot using the lowest possible 720p quality? Did you whip the camera back and forth as fast as you could? Have you tried MJPEG 720p? There's absolutely no mud in MJPEG shots. EVER! To me, this looks like you put the camera at the lowest possible quality setting and jerked the camera from side to side. But with no details about the shot/settings, I can only guess.

Mike
 
mikeydvx said:
You'd have to know the context of that shot. Was that shot using the lowest possible 720p quality? Did you whip the camera back and forth as fast as you could? Have you tried MJPEG 720p? There's absolutely no mud in MJPEG shots. EVER! To me, this looks like you put the camera at the lowest possible quality setting and jerked the camera from side to side. But with no details about the shot/settings, I can only guess.
Click to expand...
I'm totally aware that this is only a codec issue in AVCHD recording mode. And yes, that mud picture did occur while panning *very* fast and I know that you can avoid it when doing careful panning. Of course MJPEG doesn't have mud, that's fine. Unfortunately filming MJPEG recording mode is fixed to 30fps and that's not useful to me at all.

I only wanted to point out that 720p AVCHD is not completely mud free. Now back to original topic. Or not. Whatever ;)
 
Pepster said:
The 5D image quality (ie look) is close to the RedOne. View comparison here:
http://www.vimeo.com/5160288
Click to expand...

That is one of the worst tests I've ever seen comparing cameras. Anyone that's looked at Red One footage before knows the Red can deliver much higher quality footage than what is shown in that test. Also the shots aren't even the same. It's actually funny how whoever shot the test thinks that being tight on the Red and wide on the 5D constitutes the same shot and therefore is a basis for comparison. And we're not even looking at the shots at their native resolution. I'd like to see someone shoot both cameras at their highest resolution, then compare.

What would be better is give the Red to a DP experienced with using the Red and the 5D to a DP experienced with the 5D and see who delivers the better shots. The 5D is a great camera and worthy of use in many situation, but the Red will destroy the 5D. There's no comparison.
 
pailes said:
I have no clue what kind of ghosting you are talking about, but I totally agree to what Brad is saying. When going slowmo go with the highest shutter you can have. Motion blur just doesn't look good with slow motion.
Click to expand...
In regards to Brad C's video, if you don't see it fine. But it screams at me. That is the very thing that causes the stutter in the video making the motion not look smooth. It might be sharp....but not smooth. What do you think I was saying earlier about motion blur. You get rid of it at 1/120 when using 60p...go beyond that and you introduce a different type of artifact. Inthe example with his little child you don't see it as much because he is not running accross the screen...but the skateboard video you see it very well because there is plenty of movement "across" the screen. It's a slow motion stutter. People get carried away sometimes with high shutter because everything looks so sharp....but if they are looking for buttery smooth slow motion that's not the route to go. His piece did look good for what it is though...and if that's the look he's going for then more power to him and anyone else that desires it. But my answer was directly in response to his question about being "jittery" and "unpleasing." Was it jittery...yes. Unpleasing...no.

That skateboard piece shot on the Red One...I'm not sur of his settings but if it was 120fps...then I'm sure he used a 1/240 shutter speed for that buttery smooth slow motion. anything higher would have probably looked even sharper...but requiring morelight and more stuttery in motion.

Edit: Though, like I said I see it throughout the entire video, take a look at 1:30 to 1:34 where it really sticksout. While he's kicking or pushing the skateboard to excelerate look at his heels (or entire right foot). That's the ghosting I'm talking about. But regardless it's everywhere. Nice video nonetheless.
 
Last edited:
Ian-T; said:
While he's kicking or pushing the skateboard to excelerate look at his heels (or entire right foot). That's the ghosting I'm talking about. But regardless it's everywhere. Nice video nonetheless.
Click to expand...

Ian, let me just correct you real quick the in the skate video that I did, when you're referring to the section where I push to the other side of the skatepark and it starts "ghosting"..... thats not because of the shutter speed. It's because I just chose to actually speed the video up during the ride between tricks in that one section.
 
Brad_C said:
Ian, let me just correct you real quick the in the skate video that I did, when you're referring to the section where I push to the other side of the skatepark and it starts "ghosting"..... thats not because of the shutter speed. It's because I just chose to actually speed the video up during the ride between tricks in that one section.
Click to expand...
Ok. But I have to ask what did I say that was incorrect? Sped up, slowed down it's still an artifact of high shutter speed. That's all. Whether or not it was ramped back up to normal speed those artifacts exist. All I was saying is that I see it in the overall video when slowed down also.

Try this experiment.....shoot a bouncing ball in slow motion and switch between the different shutter speeds in each clip. Make sure you shoot 60p @ 1/120th shutter first then work your way up from there. I gaurantee you will see a big difference in how smooth each clip looks. 1/120 will be the smoothest.
 
lol Ian ya peeper

I just thought it looked cool, I wasn't looking for artifacts.

Now I have to find out if I can get similar results with the MKII and twixtor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top