GH4 GH4, GH3, 5DIII, C100, and 7D Shootout. Can you tell the GH4?

B

Benjobe

Well-known member
I think this is the best GH4 comparison I've seen yet, and it's a pretty cool music video to boot!

http://youtu.be/7ASoxytKzfU

I paused the video several times to write down notes on how each camera looked to me. I was very surprised to find out which camera was which at the end of the piece. Here's the blog explaining their process and their own analysis of the results.

http://www.hillbillygriptruck.com/2014/04/i-got-call-last-week-from-my-friends-at.html

What do you think? Were you able to spot the GH4?
 
"We'd haze the room. Haze gives a lovely "volume" to light, but also, the tiny particles in the air can show up as "details" to the camera and can really push the limits of the codec."

Arrgh!! Do they also play radio static in the background while conducting mic tests?
 
Why turn what should be a nice performance video with a talented and attractive singer into a poorly thought out camera pissing competition? Seriously, test videos, like behind the scenes videos are given way too much importance these days.
 
I think it's a really clever test and shows how little difference there is in all the hype about 4K, 2K and all the other cameras. It shows you that the suckers are the ones that believe the manufacturers hype. Why buy a camera capable of 4K when you're going to show your stuff on the web, or burn a crappy DVD of your high school play. The now dated ZAcuto shootout was probably the best conducted multicam test I've seen and still there were those who complained about it as a poorly conducted pissing competition. I love the fact that most viewers can't and never will be able to pick a $20K cam from a $1500 one.
 
Having different lenses really makes it hard to compare them. I thought the GH3 with the 12-35 looked the best for this type of shoot, though not necessarily in every shot. The only camera I could pick out with certainty was the 7D, which just looked really soft, muddy, and overly contrasted compared to the others. At very least the test is making me look at the 12-35 more than I was previously. Otherwise... I don't know, not a solid baseline to compare anything.
 
Ah this is fantastic and a great real world test. Props to the people that took their time to show us. I don't think this is a waste of time at all - it's informational for us, we get to see and hear nice eye candy - and I'm sure the musicians get some nice showreel clips and practice playing.

I watched this first on my little 5" phone screen and instantly preferred 5. Then skipped again on my calibrated monitor and still preferred 5. Very useful to see how the camera looks and in relation to other cameras and with real subjects. Not everyone has the time or budget to do the post work and get those LUT and grade.
 
Thanks, guys! The truth is that we shot that test for ourselves, then decided it was interesting enough to share. Each camera came from a different freelancer using the lenses they own and use every day, so for us, it was as real-world as it gets. We only had a couple hours and tried to create a balanced test that would give each of us a sense of how the camera responded to the things we were concerned about - DOF, detail, noise, etc. In a short amount of time we all got a sense of the gh4 as compared to our own camera. As to haze, thats a very common thing requested on music videos and a challenge for codecs - so again, thats very real at least to me. I guess the comparison was more about the gh4 vs our established shooting practices rather than absolute camera potential. I mean, I imagine all the cameras would have been better with Zeiss primes.

I was pretty set on upgrading to a 5d3 before this test, but the rendition of skin really put me off. For me, its gh4 + speed booster or the c100. The very fact that each of us is taking something different from the test kinda proves to me that it wasn't entirely useless. Sorry if anyone feels we wasted their time. It answered heaps of questions for me. Especially the one, "just how awful can youtube make compression?"
 
As a followup test, I took one wide and one medium lockdown shots from the gh4 @ 4k and did a "pan and scan" treatment on them in SD to see if it was possible to approximate large camera moves just by moving the 4k file around in an SD timeline. The youtube compression is once again horrible, but my takeaway from the test is that a lockdown wide shot @ 4k could be outstanding for things like using the same shot for wides and tights in interviews and sticking a lockdown shot in front of a live performance and still having the resolution to pull multiple cutaways from it. I don't know that I'd always go to SD, but its pretty killer to have that option.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irrICbNcz38 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irrICbNcz38
 
I don't know what it is about that song, it's like nails on a chalk board to me, Not only do I cringe when I hear the riff, but the lyrics, her voice and the overall tone is incredibly annoying. I can't even watch the video with audio turned on. But it's cool the gh4 can be so versatile while shooting 4k.
 
maranfilms said:
I don't know what it is about that song, it's like nails on a chalk board to me, Not only do I cringe when I hear the riff, but the lyrics, her voice and the overall tone is incredibly annoying. I can't even watch the video with audio turned on. But it's cool the gh4 can be so versatile while shooting 4k.
Click to expand...
Wow!!! Really?
 
maranfilms said:
I don't know what it is about that song, it's like nails on a chalk board to me, Not only do I cringe when I hear the riff, but the lyrics, her voice and the overall tone is incredibly annoying. I can't even watch the video with audio turned on. But it's cool the gh4 can be so versatile while shooting 4k.
Click to expand...

I mic'd the girls and did the mix. I don't normally record music so i'm curious if its something about the recording itself that you find irritating.
 
maranfilms said:
I don't know what it is about that song, it's like nails on a chalk board to me, Not only do I cringe when I hear the riff, but the lyrics, her voice and the overall tone is incredibly annoying. I can't even watch the video with audio turned on. But it's cool the gh4 can be so versatile while shooting 4k.
Click to expand...
...and that's why a definitive test will never exist - everyone has an opinion and a different priority - I thought the music was neutral and didn't distract from the pics - great idea
 
malibudutchie said:
...and that's why a definitive test will never exist - everyone has an opinion and a different priority
Click to expand...
Exactly!!! I personally find the concept really clever...the video well made, cuts are 95% on the bit which I really like, I think the singer is sweet with a nice voice, the song is good and the audio is just fine (we re talking about three instruments and a voice in an empty room here...I dont know what more somebody could expect!!!)....:shocked:
About the technical stuff...I think we have to start thinking a little ''out of the box''...so what if the lenses or the settings were not the same for every camera? Its not some stupid chart in front of the camera...its real people...!
Nice job guys...:)
 
Last edited:
I thought the recording was good, She's very pretty, everyone has a singer that get under their skin. As far as the test goes, I actually liked it. I watched it several times to tell you the truth. I also commented on the youtube page pertaining the guy that thought the 7d looked the best. So subjective, it's all personal choice really in this biz.
 
maranfilms said:
I also commented on the youtube page pertaining the guy that thought the 7d looked the best. So subjective, it's all personal choice really in this biz.
Click to expand...

I think anyone preferring the 7D is just weird. In comparison to other cameras in that test I mean. It just looks technically bad from the way the guitar strings aliase, to her hair being mushy, and skin tones being more unflattering. I challenge that person to watch it again on a better monitor!

It's not like it has any charm like 8mm or special lens coatings. I mean, I do kind of miss the VHS fuzzy TV static look, but not much... it's a bad sign if newer generation prefer, what's essentially, 480p youtube quality!
 
I thought the GH3 was the GH4 (it looked the sharpest) and that everything else was a Canon camera. But I didn't read the descrption to see that a C100 and GH3 and two GH4 cameras were included in the test.
 
What's odd is how soft the 7D looked compared to the 5d3. I figured that the 5D3 would appear softer than the 7D. Maybe it is the ISO's being used. Or maybe it is actually out of focus.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top