Thanks
I am already using that setting, picked it up in another thread somewhere
GH3 GH3 in Low shooting
- Thread starter deckitout
- Start date
Thanks
I am already using that setting, picked it up in another thread somewhere
It's great to have a fast lens, but keep in mind, if you open up to f/1.6 (the 12mm lens) or whatever, your depth of field compresses like crazy. Now, if you are on a tripod and photographing/filming non-moving people/objects, that's OK, but it gets trickier on moving stuff and event type work. Personally, I think the 12-35 f/2.8 on the GH3 is not the worst, as it has lens stabilization, so you're picking up a stop or two if you're mobile and not on a tripod, and that lens is sharp at 12mm, whereas some of these lenses may be theoretically faster, but sometimes may not be as sharp wide open, so you end up going to 2.8 anyway, so it ends up a wash. So really, there is no substitute for a sensor that can record clean footage at higher ISO. If ISO 1600 on the GH3 with the 12-35 f/2.8 is not good enough (that's about the limit I see), then it becomes a dilemma - it just might be that the GH3 is not good enough for those situations - a faster lens may or may not help at that point, given the realities of depth of field and having to handhold.
Simon Shasha
Well-known member
+1
Especially in live-event situations, you will most likely be going to F2.8 in order to compensate for subject movement. If you can't get enough light to make an image at F2.8 @ 1600ISO, the problem isn't the camera/aperture, it's the location. You can attempt dropping your shutter to 40 and allow slightly more light in (some even claim that a shutter of 40 gives a more "cinematic fluidity" to GH3 footage), however, you may or may not get stobbing from lights.
In my line of work, I will admit, I have shot a lot at F1.4 (on Canon DSLRs - mainly because I never liked going over 640ISO on my 7D/60D), but it definitely was not easy. I'm not too fond of very shallow DoF - one of the main reasons (other than resolution and codec) that I moved to mFT/GH3 was for its deeper DoF - it helps a lot in live-event situations, believe me.
Bruce Foreman
Veteran
The Olympus 12mm f2.0 gets good reports from users, very sharp and being a wide angle (24mm equiv) shallow depth of field is not the problem it might be with longer lenses. Spatial relationships are rendered with less magnification than with longer lenses.
I don't have that one (yet) but I do have the Lumix 14mm f2.5 and find that one very usable for me.
Ianscreations
Well-known member
I think it is also important that 1600 iso should not be an arbitrary cutoff for the GH3 in low light. I'm sure you and everyone else here recognizes that the look is entirely contingent upon the project itself. I agree with Bruce that noise at 2500 and above actually doesn't look too bad with good glass.
I routinely shoot 2500 iso with 1.4 and .95 glass.
Here is an example I just posted this morning. All of the reception shots are shot using the Voightlander .95 at 2500 iso. In fact, I deliberately added grain to the cake cutting shot.
http://vimeo.com/80457378
I routinely shoot 2500 iso with 1.4 and .95 glass.
Here is an example I just posted this morning. All of the reception shots are shot using the Voightlander .95 at 2500 iso. In fact, I deliberately added grain to the cake cutting shot.
http://vimeo.com/80457378
Bruce Foreman
Veteran
Looks good, Ian. I enjoyed seeing what you did with that.
that was pretty good. but you have to admit, the noise that can be seen in the grooms suit during when they were both cutting the cake was very present
Keep in mind that, when shooting 24p, you can set your shutter speed to 1/30 or even 1/25 to get basically an extra stop of exposure. Some folks can't stand the "open shutter" look but I think much of that is yielding to dogma. I was persuaded against my better judgment to shoot a project at 1/30 shutter and it really looks just fine.
Now if you are shooting 60p, you'll have to at least have a 1/60 shutter of course so low-light is a bigger hurdle in those situations.
Now if you are shooting 60p, you'll have to at least have a 1/60 shutter of course so low-light is a bigger hurdle in those situations.
stoneinapond
Veteran
Indeed!
And strange motion artifacts and flickering from lights, dependent on where you are.
GHKAM
Well-known member
I shot a live show in a club and didn't see flickering in the footage until later viewing on PC.
How are you supposed to know, calculate and/or avoid this?
Ianscreations
Well-known member
That at is precisely why I mentioned I deliberately added grain to that shot. I like the 'home video' look to that event. You don't see the grain in the suit when he is throwing the garter or dancing and those were all ISO 2500.
In the United States, a 1/30th setting is just as flicker free as 1/60th. What kills me is cheap LED lighting on many music stages. No matter what shutter speed you're at, you can't get rid of the flicker. And the skin tones are usually horrid.
Ianscreations
Well-known member
I generally stick with a 1/50th shutter when shooting 24p. I thought I had read that this would be the best shutter speed to avoid the LED flicker effect, but I still run into it.
You are so right about the skin tones. You can't even color correct that mess.
Rolf Silber
Veteran
If in a club or on a fairground lightsources do run on very old ballasts, you may get problems whch are not resolvable.
If you use very high shutter speed - above 1/200 - also phase-shifting may set in (crawling shadows).
Under normal condition, this one is helpful:
http://www.davidsatz.com/flickercalculator_en.html
http://www.davidsatz.com/aboutflicker_en.html
fast penses GH#
fast penses GH#
Your best bet is the Voigtlander line of M43 lenses
1- 17,5mm 0.95
2- 25mm 0.95
3- 42mm 0.95
4- 35mm 1.2
5- 50mm 1.1
fast penses GH#
Your best bet is the Voigtlander line of M43 lenses
1- 17,5mm 0.95
2- 25mm 0.95
3- 42mm 0.95
4- 35mm 1.2
5- 50mm 1.1
stoneinapond
Veteran
Not if you are smart about what it is you are shooting......