Or the main actress recognized in the other woman a mental state that mirrored her own. And then offered a simple smile as a way to show she could empathize...
On the technical end, I found all three cameras did a fine job. Inspiring.
GH1 vs Red One vs Canon 5D Mk II footage comparison shoot out!
- Thread starter PappasArts
- Start date
Or the main actress recognized in the other woman a mental state that mirrored her own. And then offered a simple smile as a way to show she could empathize...
On the technical end, I found all three cameras did a fine job. Inspiring.
Emanuel
Cross-Examiner
I've been thinking the same as far as 5D Mark II aliasing or loss of detail @ 1080p concerns.
Here's an interesting example of this technique extended to a whole product (music video) and over the D90's limitations:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=179674
Incredible effort there, wow. Did they shoot 3 simultaneously... actually dumb question because, unless they could stack them one on top of the other... Doubt it though.
One thing's for sure, the images are incredible. No idea about the motion though. Seems like for a establishing shot it'd have to look a bit overcranked/time lapsey. Also I think I read the D90 does 4.5fps burst, that's 1fps more than the 3.5 of the GH1.
Mark Harris
Pain in the ass
Weird, on EVIE, the 60fs stuff we shot in 2K was still exceptionally clear. That's the shot where we all noticed that leah has a chip in her tooth and could count the freckles on her face.
jenningsp
Well-known member
at 1:33-1:35 there are two shots that seem to be taken at the exact same time. one with the GH1 the other with the 5D....
The GH1 is at iso 400 and the 5D at 1250 but they both seem to be the same actual brightness....
the ultraprime at T2 is probably slightly brighter than a ZE at f2 though. so that would account for about 1/4 of a stop... but where's the extra stop coming from??? shutter speed?
or does the ultracontrast filter on the 5D make you lose 1 stop? or is the GH1 actually 1 stop brighter than it's supposed to be?
hmmm.... also i'm really interested in these ultracontrast filters. i've been wanting one for a while. anyone have any experience with them??????
cheers!
The GH1 is at iso 400 and the 5D at 1250 but they both seem to be the same actual brightness....
the ultraprime at T2 is probably slightly brighter than a ZE at f2 though. so that would account for about 1/4 of a stop... but where's the extra stop coming from??? shutter speed?
or does the ultracontrast filter on the 5D make you lose 1 stop? or is the GH1 actually 1 stop brighter than it's supposed to be?
hmmm.... also i'm really interested in these ultracontrast filters. i've been wanting one for a while. anyone have any experience with them??????
cheers!
commanderspike
Carbonite Member
Is it just me that notices more noise in the RED footage than in either the 5D or GH1 shots?
Nathan Troutman
Active member
I noticed this as well. The beginning nighttime shots also have the GH1 at ISO 400 while the 5D is ISO 2500 or ISO 1250 in very similar lighting conditions that yield almost identical visual results. There are also no shots of the GH1 using any higher than 400 ISO. My only theory would be they were trying to match the DOF between the two cameras and shot the GH1 wide open and the 5D significantly stopped down which would require the higher ISO setting. Only the shooter would know.
There are two daytime shots with the 5D at ISO 50 but I don't remember the 5D being able to shoot 50 ISO??
Illya Friedman
Well-known member
Hi Jenningsp. In answer to you question, yes, both the 5dmk2 and GH1 were shooting the exact same action simultaneously. There are some BTS stills from that parking garage on my website.
The reason that the GH1 was at ISO 400 is because, (as I've been saying for months) the camera has an effective ISO much faster than rated in camera.
There is a shot that I don't think made the cut. The GH1 was shot at night with an ND6, 100ISO and 1/50 shutter, next to the Canon 5D which was set at 1250ISO and 1/30 shutter. Granted this Panasonic settings were in error, and darker than it should have been, but amazingly there was still a respectable image produced.
Lead DP and organizer of the 3x camera intercutting test, Byron Shah has given me permission to post the notes from the shoot in my blog here.
Matt Gottshalk
Resident Preditor
Yeah I don't buy that for a second.
Illya Friedman
Well-known member
You don't have to buy it. I'll even say that your mileage may vary.
I'm just reporting what seems to have work quite well for the first feature film shot on the GH1, this 3x camera test, and another project that is in the works right now.
I'm just reporting what seems to have work quite well for the first feature film shot on the GH1, this 3x camera test, and another project that is in the works right now.
PappasArts
Veteran
To quote Byron Shah :
"" The Lumix was parked at 400 for most of the day (although the camera goes to 2500 i believe); at 400 is was easily as sensitive as the Canon at 2000 or so. The Canon we looked at from 50 to 2500. The RED of course is 160 (or call it 320 if you like).""
I haven't run the tests myself, however are some you suggesting that Byron Shah doesn't know how to rate a camera with a light meter. Cause if you are; ( and that's how your sounding ) that's pretty insulting to a fellow colleague. I mean using a light meter is not even 101 basics, it's more like 100 educational basics. Byron Shah is conservative when rating the Red, so he probably applies his methods the same on any test he does with a camera.
Anyhow I think you should give Byron Shah as well Illya Friedman the benefit of the doubt as it doesn't serve them one grain of Malibu sand to put out false data intentionally on any of theses cameras. That's the only thing you shouldn't buy for a second.
On a side note:
Last night I was shooting on PCH in Newport beach around 1:00am with a 210mm at 3.5 ( a Vivitar series 1 Kiron 70 to 210mm ) with a setting at 500asa. It's pretty amazing to see how well this camera can do in low light and still be super clean.
.
Michael Pappas
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms
Anamorphic DSLR Lens Test Images... links:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1638289&postcount=97
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1637705&postcount=84
Facebook & Myspace:
http://www.facebook.com/people/Michael-Pappas/573417404
http://www.Myspace.com/PappasArts
Arrfilms@hotmail.com
http://www.PappasArts.com
"" The Lumix was parked at 400 for most of the day (although the camera goes to 2500 i believe); at 400 is was easily as sensitive as the Canon at 2000 or so. The Canon we looked at from 50 to 2500. The RED of course is 160 (or call it 320 if you like).""
I haven't run the tests myself, however are some you suggesting that Byron Shah doesn't know how to rate a camera with a light meter. Cause if you are; ( and that's how your sounding ) that's pretty insulting to a fellow colleague. I mean using a light meter is not even 101 basics, it's more like 100 educational basics. Byron Shah is conservative when rating the Red, so he probably applies his methods the same on any test he does with a camera.
Anyhow I think you should give Byron Shah as well Illya Friedman the benefit of the doubt as it doesn't serve them one grain of Malibu sand to put out false data intentionally on any of theses cameras. That's the only thing you shouldn't buy for a second.
On a side note:
Last night I was shooting on PCH in Newport beach around 1:00am with a 210mm at 3.5 ( a Vivitar series 1 Kiron 70 to 210mm ) with a setting at 500asa. It's pretty amazing to see how well this camera can do in low light and still be super clean.
.
Michael Pappas
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms
Anamorphic DSLR Lens Test Images... links:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1638289&postcount=97
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1637705&postcount=84
Facebook & Myspace:
http://www.facebook.com/people/Michael-Pappas/573417404
http://www.Myspace.com/PappasArts
Arrfilms@hotmail.com
http://www.PappasArts.com
GH1 sensitivity @400 iso = 5D @2000 iso?
theres something wrong there. thats 2 1/3 stop discrepancy. assuming youre using the same glass.
remeber the canon 70-200 2.8 @ while "physically" a F2.8 is probably more like a T3.5 or T4.0...
that can MAYBE account for a discepancy like that.
theres something wrong there. thats 2 1/3 stop discrepancy. assuming youre using the same glass.
remeber the canon 70-200 2.8 @ while "physically" a F2.8 is probably more like a T3.5 or T4.0...
that can MAYBE account for a discepancy like that.
That's pretty much what I'm thinking. With the same exact glass at the same exact stop, the MKii is easily a stop more sensitive than the GH-1 @ 320iso. While a stop isn't much (these days, remember when the HVX200 + SGpro was like 100ISO? LOL) it's still about a stop better.
commanderspike
Carbonite Member
I read the cinematographer's notes kindly provided via Illya's website and I think they had to stop down the 5D to get a useably focus and there is bound to be something clouding their perception of sensitivity...
"DOF on the 5D2 is very thin, which can be extraordinarily beautiful, but also makes pulling focus incredibly critical, even at deep stops (like T4 and T5.6). Again, very hard to judge critical focus on the camera."
"The small cameras are also WAY more sensitive than the RED, and are naturally fantastic at shooting available-light night exteriors. The Lumix was parked at 400 for most of the day (although the camera goes to 2500 i believe); at 400 is was easily as sensitive as the Canon at 2000 or so. The Canon we looked at from 50 to 2500. The RED of course is 160 (or call it 320 if you like)."
There is no mention of ND filters, shutter speeds and aperture settings there, so what was done to the 5D to give ISO 2000 a similar level of brightness to the GH1 at ISO 400?
It may be that the GH1's over sensitivity at ISO 400 is clouded by having it shoot at 24p instead of 30p... a lower shutter speed should provide longer exposures on each frame. Or it may be that the 5D's larger sensor eats more light - the light from the lens is spread more thinly. Therefore an F2.0 lens on the 5D would provide 4/3rds the brightness it would mounted on the GH1.
Of course the small cameras at ISO 400 and 2000 are gonna be more sensitive than the RED at ISO 160. The 5D and GH1 also feature more recent sensors, and sensitivity improves with each generation. Whilst the RED impresses me in all the footage I have seen, the sensor seems something of a weak point to me. Time they got a major update out. Its noisy!
"DOF on the 5D2 is very thin, which can be extraordinarily beautiful, but also makes pulling focus incredibly critical, even at deep stops (like T4 and T5.6). Again, very hard to judge critical focus on the camera."
"The small cameras are also WAY more sensitive than the RED, and are naturally fantastic at shooting available-light night exteriors. The Lumix was parked at 400 for most of the day (although the camera goes to 2500 i believe); at 400 is was easily as sensitive as the Canon at 2000 or so. The Canon we looked at from 50 to 2500. The RED of course is 160 (or call it 320 if you like)."
There is no mention of ND filters, shutter speeds and aperture settings there, so what was done to the 5D to give ISO 2000 a similar level of brightness to the GH1 at ISO 400?
It may be that the GH1's over sensitivity at ISO 400 is clouded by having it shoot at 24p instead of 30p... a lower shutter speed should provide longer exposures on each frame. Or it may be that the 5D's larger sensor eats more light - the light from the lens is spread more thinly. Therefore an F2.0 lens on the 5D would provide 4/3rds the brightness it would mounted on the GH1.
Of course the small cameras at ISO 400 and 2000 are gonna be more sensitive than the RED at ISO 160. The 5D and GH1 also feature more recent sensors, and sensitivity improves with each generation. Whilst the RED impresses me in all the footage I have seen, the sensor seems something of a weak point to me. Time they got a major update out. Its noisy!
PappasArts
Veteran
My response is not whether it is or it's not good in low light.
Kholi, you read to much into things. It was a statement on how conducting questioning/analysis on other colleague's testing methods with phrases like ( Yeah I don't buy that for a second ). That is a nice way of saying your data is Bullsh*t. Like I said kholi, you read into it to much and thought it was about you directly. Oops!
And my side note was that; a side note. Meaning not related directly at the subject of concern. Hence the phrase " side note".....
XOXO's.
And this is exactly why I say the MKii's extra stop is useless. You need to bend your way of thinking if you're used to shooting @ Academy FOV. And that means either framing for the 720p crop later or stopping down.
A) ISO is a tricky thing when dealing with RED. It's native ISO is somewhere around 250. Meaning if you rate the image @ 320 it looks like it's underexposed a bit by your meter's measure. If you rate it at about 250 then it's properly exposed by your meter's measure. I don't know how this changed in build 20, I'm assuming that everything is damned near spot on.
So yes, the MKii and GH-1 are more sensitive @ 320 than RED.
B) Noisy footage has always been a deal with RED. But keep in mind that this footage is at 3K and is not representative of RED's max potential. Regardless of how much it actually outputs, 4K images look much better, cleaner, than 3K or 2K. Second, this is an older build.
Believe me when I say that as of Build 20 and Color Science, other camera manufacturers need to once again step their game up. In fact, Color Science makes old footage look like gold once more. It is indeed a new camera without a hardware update, and I can only imagine how extra sick a new sensor update to the RED would be.
This footage, while well shot, doesn't look like it was posted to the full potential that RED has. Regardless, the GH-1 holds ground like whoa.
My response is not whether it is or it's not good in low light.
Kholi, you read to much into things. It was a statement on how conducting questioning/analysis on other colleague's testing methods with phrases like ( Yeah I don't buy that for a second ). That is a nice way of saying your data is Bullsh*t. Like I said kholi, you read into it to much and thought it was about you directly. Oops!
And my side note was that; a side note. Meaning not related directly at the subject of concern. Hence the phrase " side note".....
.
Didn't say it was aimed at me. =T Please quote me where I said so versus openly defending the right to disagree with the statement that was made about the GH-1 in comparison to the MKii.
Furthermore, I don't see ANY well-documented test methods in that post. So why is test method even a part of this discussion when it wasn't shown?
Hope you're enjoying the GH-1, man.
Ben_B
Veteran
Man this shooter loves the soft focus eh?
Anyway I liked the video...I thought the 5D stuff stuck out in a few places as different than the other two. I thought that this doesn't exactly represent any of the cameras at their best, and while they may have matched up great, they might not have if they're all looking at their best...if that makes any sense?
Anyway I liked the video...I thought the 5D stuff stuck out in a few places as different than the other two. I thought that this doesn't exactly represent any of the cameras at their best, and while they may have matched up great, they might not have if they're all looking at their best...if that makes any sense?