GH1 vs Red One vs Canon 5D Mk II footage comparison shoot out!

[PappasArts]

Hope you're enjoying the GH-1, man.

The GH1 is way way more impressive than it should be for the money. It can deliver an excellent 1080/24. Love having a real View Finder too. Very happy with it! Oh and the lens flange really opens the door to different possibilities.

BTW, I had the MII a few weeks ago for testing. Just couldn't take the bolted on video BS that it feels like. Can't stand the Narrow DOF either. It's to much. APS-C or M4/3 is the way to go. So No way hands down is that better than the GH1. The 30P thing sucks; wish it did 24. I guess we can call it an IWERKS camera!

 

[Ozpeter]

The GH1 is way way more impressive than it should be for the money.

It's a 'law of diminishing returns' thing, which has been very evident in audio technology for some years, and is now seeming to be coming to video. In audio, you can get some stupidly good results from lower priced gear especially after a bit of post-production - the higher priced gear still gets a better result, but you have to pay three or four times the price to get that 10% edge. Same now seems true when comparing the GH1 with the Red.

How this will affect professional users remains to be seen - in audio, there's a lot of pros having a tough time because total amateurs can convince customers that they can get good results for a fraction of the price - but as always, it ain't what you've got, it's the way that you use it, and you still need a pro to really get the pro results (well, most of the time).

 

[Barry_Green]

Thats so interesting, i assumed sincei t was till higher than 1080, that it would down sample well... but it didint. interesting.

There's numbers, and then there's reality.

Yes, "2K" sounds higher than 1080p. But it's 2K ON A BAYER PATTERN SENSOR, which means you have to chop it down by a good 25-30% to get the real resolution number. So 2048 - 30% = about 1400. So probably 1400 x about 800, more than 720p but nowhere near the 1080p that an HPX3000 or PDW700 could produce.

 

[filmmaker's gang]

what would JJ say reading you barry?..

4k ON A BAYER PATTERN SENSOR is 3.2
less 20% not 30%

graeme's numbers

 

[commanderspike]

It's a 'law of diminishing returns' thing, which has been very evident in audio technology for some years, and is now seeming to be coming to video. In audio, you can get some stupidly good results from lower priced gear especially after a bit of post-production - the higher priced gear still gets a better result, but you have to pay three or four times the price to get that 10% edge. Same now seems true when comparing the GH1 with the Red.

How this will affect professional users remains to be seen - in audio, there's a lot of pros having a tough time because total amateurs can convince customers that they can get good results for a fraction of the price - but as always, it ain't what you've got, it's the way that you use it, and you still need a pro to really get the pro results (well, most of the time).

The GH1 is the result of a massive investment in CMOS technology over the years. It's not surprising that the mass produced technology has got to such a high standard. I agree about the laws of diminishing returns. Like in F1 racing - a fast car does not have the same margin left in it for improvement as a slow car does. The last mile is the hardest mile, etc. Rubbish camcorders and tiny CCD sensors have been around for such a long time only because of cost reasons. Now the next generation of technology has become affordable, we are gonna see some big strides until it stagnates again and we need new sensor technology.

I think the next generation of sensor technology will be free from the CMOS negatives such as jello and fixed pattern noise, and of course as the image processor CPU gets faster, mud and scaling quality issues will vanish as well. Then resolution will increase and we'll eventually have new lens technology, such as a spherical sensor which wraps around the curvature of the lens like how the human eye works, meaning lenses can be made more simplistic and free from distortion.

In the mean time, I'll be interested to see how much a back-lit sensor improves image quality. These models may only be compacts, but they are just around the corner from Sony & Panasonic. Their margin of improvement might dictate to a large extent how good the GH2 is going to be. Have they found big gains with this?

 

[Graeme_Nattress]

what would JJ say reading you barry?..

4k ON A BAYER PATTERN SENSOR is 3.2
less 20% not 30%

graeme's numbers

http://www.cinematography.net/natress-red-res.html shows the performance of the RED quite nicely. Plotted graphs show the MTF out to 4k, showing very strong modulation at 2k and still good detail at 3k. As to when "you call it", I've called it around 3.2k, but you can see detail beyond that.

Remember though, that you can't measured resolution properly unless you also measure aliasing at the same time. It's perfectly possible for a camera to measure 100% of it's rated pixel resolution if and only if allows for excessive aliasing. A camera can even respond to detail beyond it's resolution if there is inadequate low pass filtering. However, in both cases, the results can be ugly...

Graeme

 

[Nitsuj]

It's a 'law of diminishing returns' thing, which has been very evident in audio technology for some years, and is now seeming to be coming to video. In audio, you can get some stupidly good results from lower priced gear especially after a bit of post-production - the higher priced gear still gets a better result, but you have to pay three or four times the price to get that 10% edge. Same now seems true when comparing the GH1 with the Red.

How this will affect professional users remains to be seen - in audio, there's a lot of pros having a tough time because total amateurs can convince customers that they can get good results for a fraction of the price - but as always, it ain't what you've got, it's the way that you use it, and you still need a pro to really get the pro results (well, most of the time).

I consider it allowing talented people the means to express themselves instead of being shut out due to financial summits. It will all boil down to talent instead of what equipment somebody has and that is a push in the right direction in my eyes.

 

[Barry_Green]

what would JJ say reading you barry?..

I would certainly hope he'd agree, since I printed the truth.

4k ON A BAYER PATTERN SENSOR is 3.2
less 20% not 30%

graeme's numbers

Graeme's number is 78%, last I knew. And Graeme will tell you himself that he's got an extremely efficient debayer that performs better than most. And I think you'll find that almost anyone who knows anything about sampling theory would say that a debayer loss of 25% to 30% is entirely reasonable and to be expected.

If we go by Graeme's 78%, then we're talking about a raster of 1600 x 900. Still quite a bit below what 1080p would register, still falling between 720p and 1080p as I said, and therefore backing up Timur's observations as to why his 2K shots looked softer.

 

[Graeme_Nattress]

Ah but you can only get a 100% rating (even on a 3 chip system) with, to me, unacceptable levels of aliasing... Some will even to respond to detail above 100% with strongly visible aliasing. Not nice.

Even a MTF curve, being better than just a single figure for resolution, does not tell enough. You need to plot how the curve extends beyond rated resolution and see what happens there too!

Graeme

 

[Graeme_Nattress]

To add, part of the problem is that rez charts generally max out at HD rez, and don't have strong frequency content beyond HD rez. That means you don't see the increase in aliasing from those very high levels of detail.

Graeme

 

[commanderspike]

I admire the RED system but it has always been well out of reach for me.

RED must be worried that the trickle down from HUGE investments at Panasonic will reach yet more affordable cams which will be lapped up by the very market that RED provides for... not tourists or Handycam dads, but indie & pro film makers.

I know Panasonic went to a lot of effort to make the GH1 'consumer friendly', what with AF and the continuous iris super zoom lens, etc. but it simply amazing that Panasonic can make a camera body like that for the price it retails at.

The GH1 is even more of a bargain when you consider the extra expense of the kit lens.

That money is better spent on a Zeiss or Leica... and then, with a fast quality lens, the GH1 is truly a worthy RED competitor.

 

[TimurCivan]

Sorry to lay out the truth here gentlemen.

The GH1 is in not much of a competitor to a RED one. Its two completely different classes of camera and productions that will use it.

There is not a SINGLE production where i would consider a gh1 or CAnon5D mkII as a subsitution to a RED ONE.

This is not to say you cant use it as a B camera, but i would never ever rely on its Long GOP codec, formfactor, or hacktastic methods of audio recording. For the love of god, they dont even have proper exposure monitoring....

What this really boils down to is the appropriate tool for the job. on a shoot where you have 500$ budget. YES! by all means shoot on a GH1. Its the inexpensive tool for a small job.

But for a $30,000 music Video, there is nothign that could convince me to shoot primarily on a system that small and devoid of neccesary features.

 

[Ben_B]

Real-time histogram is not proper exposure monitoring?

I get why Zebras and such are there, but I don't really use them.

 

[TimurCivan]

No a histogram is not a proper exposure meter for motion pictures.
They just allow for a photographer to see where the bulk of his or her exposure lies. they dont really account for backlit subjects accurately, in that you cant see where the exposure levels on a face fall.

A waveform, Zebra or False color is appropriate for a moving image. it allows you to exactly where your points of over/under exposure are....

 

[commanderspike]

Timur I am not so sure my point has been gotten across right... what I am saying is that the GH1 opens up the playing field, it means for the first time that talent can be backed up by image quality that was previously the exclusive domain of a professional.

Obviously, the RED has many pro features which will probably never work their way down to a consumer camera. Not that things like zebras and proper audio is hard to add if Panasonic felt inclined.

No, my point is over image quality and lenses. The video which is the subject of this whole topic proves it can be done - that GH1 footage can compete with RED footage when it's in the hands of a pro.

This must be of concern to the guys at RED. Their premium solution just got a whole lot less valuable.

Lastly, that the GH1 can work with such a broad range of lenses, even Kodak Ektar C-Mounts, 25mm F0.95 TV lenses and some of the best 35mm film SLR lenses ever made really does open up a huge range of shooting styles. The circular bokeh of c-mount lenses simply cannot be achieved on large format sensors or RED cameras while a PL mount F0.95 lens would cost an absolute arm and a leg.

 

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

Forget Red for the moment. Are we really in the same market, ballpark, universe for $1500 + $500 in accessories vs $17,000 + $10K to $30K in accessories?

For the moment, consider that 4 years ago there was no HVX.
The DVX was around $3,000. I was completely psyched to pick mine up for $2700 off Ebay in July of 2005. Thought it was a steal.
Now you have 1080 24p with interchangeable lenses and much greater latitude (albeit with some real work around issues) for half that.

Go make movie(s).

 

[Kholi]

Sorry to lay out the truth here gentlemen.

The GH1 is in not much of a competitor to a RED one. Its two completely different classes of camera and productions that will use it.

There is not a SINGLE production where i would consider a gh1 or CAnon5D mkII as a subsitution to a RED ONE.

This is not to say you cant use it as a B camera, but i would never ever rely on its Long GOP codec, formfactor, or hacktastic methods of audio recording. For the love of god, they dont even have proper exposure monitoring....

What this really boils down to is the appropriate tool for the job. on a shoot where you have 500$ budget. YES! by all means shoot on a GH1. Its the inexpensive tool for a small job.

But for a $30,000 music Video, there is nothign that could convince me to shoot primarily on a system that small and devoid of neccesary features.

I'm only playing Devil's Advocate here, so don't hate me too much (more). But, I can attest to the GH-1 and MKii being chosen over RED on recent productions exceeding the very low mark of thirty thousand dollars. Two of which were shot by DP Max Goldman and that is excluding the Heineken job that started it with that specific DP.

I wouldn't all it a substitute, I would call it an alternative and one that's viable for several productions that are feeling the pinch right now who are looking to save money wherever they can. Pay an incredible DP (which Max Goldman is) to use any tool they're familiar with and the rest of that doesn't matter.

And he isn't the only one shooting GH-1 or MKii. There's a Kleenex spot that just wrapped around here... MKii.

With all that said, they are exactly NOT substitutes for a real deal camera, but again quite viable alternatives when the team managing them has extensive experience and can handle them quick and efficiently on and off location/set.

The GH-1 needs video out, that's the only thing that ever bugs. The Compression @ 1080/24 has never been an issue for these guys.

 

[Barry_Green]

what I am saying is that the GH1 opens up the playing field, it means for the first time that talent can be backed up by image quality that was previously the exclusive domain of a professional.

We said the exact same thing when 16mm film came out.

We said the exact same thing when DV came out.

We said the exact same thing when the DVX came out.

We said the exact same thing when the HVX came out.

Seems that "for the first time" has happened a whole lot of times so far, and will probably continue to happen. :thumbsup:

No, my point is over image quality and lenses. The video which is the subject of this whole topic proves it can be done - that GH1 footage can compete with RED footage when it's in the hands of a pro.

Yes, based on this particular production, for this usage, for this vimeo distribution, the little GH1 absolutely held its own against the Red One. But that's largely tying the Red's hands behind its back. The best cinematographer with the best-skilled DIT and a Red One will always produce better-looking footage than that same cinematographer and a GH1. The Red is simply capable of much, much, much more. 4K res, more latitude, more solid codec, proper monitoring, quality audio recording, variable frame rates up to 120fps, all sorts of things the GH1 can't even begin to do.

Which is why it costs 20x as much. You do not get something for nothing.

But... with a GH1... you may not get something for nothing, but you get a hell of a lot for $1500!

This must be of concern to the guys at RED. Their premium solution just got a whole lot less valuable.

Not really. But it should surely scare the bejeebers out of the Scarlet team. They will need to have something really, really, really special now. A $7500 scarlet (without lens, mind you), or a $1500 GH1? Or, another way, a $7,500 Scarlet or a $750 (body-only) GH1? I think a whole lot of fence-sitters would probably jump off the fence at that point. Sure, there will be those of us who will appreciate the additional capabilities the Scarlet will offer over a GH1, but I think a huge swath of guys who've been waiting for the Scarlet are gonna look at their wallets and make a very different decision than they thought they were going to make.

Lastly, that the GH1 can work with such a broad range of lenses, even Kodak Ektar C-Mounts, 25mm F0.95 TV lenses and some of the best 35mm film SLR lenses ever made really does open up a huge range of shooting styles. The circular bokeh of c-mount lenses simply cannot be achieved on large format sensors or RED cameras while a PL mount F0.95 lens would cost an absolute arm and a leg.

Agree 100% -- here's where the GH1 can do things that the Red One couldn't even begin to imagine. Specialty uses, yes, but from such new capabilities spring new shooting styles and new creative expressions.

 

[Ian-T]

I'm with Commander on this one. For me it's not so important to get a Red Scarlet anymore (especially if Camera makers continue to flood the market with these little super DSLR hybrids). The images these cams put out are so much better than where most of us are coming from...and the cost ...well nuff said there.

 

[Kholi]

No, my point is over image quality and lenses. The video which is the subject of this whole topic proves it can be done - that GH1 footage can compete with RED footage when it's in the hands of a pro.

On a technical level, no it can't. On an aesthetic level, any footage can compete with RED footage if the production's helmed by those with know how.

Lastly, that the GH1 can work with such a broad range of lenses, even Kodak Ektar C-Mounts, 25mm F0.95 TV lenses and some of the best 35mm film SLR lenses ever made really does open up a huge range of shooting styles. The circular bokeh of c-mount lenses simply cannot be achieved on large format sensors or RED cameras while a PL mount F0.95 lens would cost an absolute arm and a leg.

Just about any mount can be attached to RED, that includes C-Mount lenses. You just need to shoot @ 3k or 2k to take advantage of them.