Hacked GH1 and Canon 60D shoot. My impressions of the cameras.

But this discussion is about video, and in video, S35 is the standard, not FF35. Further, the 60D is not FF either, it's close to GH2 but slightly bigger, so really, lens selection to me is only a matter of not having the m4/3 lens on the 60D and having to wait for the birger mount for electronic control of lenses that need it on the GH2, starting with EOS and then Nikon (they are making that second).
 
Oh god im not actually physically capable of continuing this discussion hehe! I mean the problem in general with these discussions actually is folk can't just have there opinion, it has to be validated with some kind of deep rooted justification. Folks have different preferences for the sensor and size, you have bloom going on about ff35mm goodness lol, and well right enough - others going on about this or that standard - s35 certainly wasnt the standard for general video camcorders either. Its all up in the air really, but it doesnt stop folk being damned well adament that there right... there justified.

Im bailing out of this discussion - no disrespect! But to save it going around in boring circles.
 
???? What did any of us say that was wrong?? grimepoch is spot on what he said. I don't think anyone here suggests that you can't have an opinion. We were just stating some facts. How you feel about the facts is another matter (like you said it's just a preference). But you don't have to feel like you can't have an opinion. I'd like to think we are all trying to be conventional filmakers up in here. If that's true...then S35 is the standard....so a GH-x/7D etc....are what should be the standard (or dang close to it) which goes back to what I asked earlier..."what crop factor?"

EDIT: Ok lawriejaffa just look at it this way.... Looking at all of this from a filmaker's point of view....a 20mm/35mm/50mm lens on these DSLRs (not includinig the 5Dll) share almost exactly (is that an Oxymoron?) the same FOV as conventional film cameras used in Hollywood studios. The 5Dll does not. So,...a typical wide 20mm would be....a typical wide 20mm in filmaking on these cams. So...to say that they are "irrelavent" on these cameras is simply "not true" to "conventional" film makers. I hope you see the point I'm making.
 
Last edited:
grimepoch said:
But this discussion is about video, and in video, S35 is the standard, not FF35.
Click to expand...
Not really. 35mm is the standard. Which is basically identical in size to the 60D, and the GH2 is just a little bit smaller. The Red is 35mm-sized, film is mostly 35mm, the F35 and Genesis and Alexa are not S35, but they're a tiny bit larger than 35mm-sized, etc.

S35 is talked about a lot like it's interchangeable with 35mm, but it's not, it's a little bigger.

The only cameras that I know of that actually have an actual, legitimate S35 sensor size would be the Red Epic-X, and maybe the F3 (it remains to be seen when they announce what the actual sensor dimensions are; from Bloom's comparison it looks like it's probably S35).
 
Last edited:
...um..well....um....I stand by everything I said except...take of the "s"... :) he he (it's the principle people...the principle!!!!)
 
I was trying to have a balanced discussion about these cameras, without starting a war. People do get very passionate in defence of what they've invested in, eh?

I come from 35mm stills cameras, and then a Canon 5D, which is effectively the same thing only digital, so I understand Lawrie's passion for full frame, but it's just not practical for shooting movies of people (as opposed to moody atmospheric nature shots etc.). There is something very right about the frame size of Academy / APS-C / Micro 4/3 for shooting movies. Just because old manual 35mm full frame lenses are all consequently a bit too long isn't a reason to doubt that. I would love it if I could make my Zeiss lenses half their current focal lengths, but it's just not possible and I now realise that I've been too much of a purist, and possibly a touch precious about that - these Lumix auto lenses really are quite brilliant.
 
Lucas Adamson said:
I don't want to start a new Canon vs. Lumix thread, as I'm a good boy and I know it's verboten, and rightly so, but I have just spent the weekend doing a shoot of a circus/physical theatre piece in a converted church (Circomedia in Bristol UK) with a hacked GH1 and a Canon 60D and there have been issues I feel I ought to report with both as I didn't know some of this stuff before (in spite of endless reading.)

1. Images from both cameras at 1080p25 match up very well. I turned NR and sharpening off on both.

2. The 60D overheated 3 times and caused error warnings. We didn't lose a shot over it, as it recorded the image to disc, but it did stop recording. The GH1 didn't at all.

3. The 60D had a max 12 minute record time. The GH1 had none.

4. The 60D produces file sizes 3 times the size of the GH1 (hacked to lpowell reliable settings) That's 16Gb to 5.5Gb as I remember it. Go figure! They're both full HD H.264 but in different wrappers - AVCHD vs. Quicktime.

5. Canon Quicktime files have consecutive unique numbering making file management during editing easy. Panasonic AVCHD files reset to 00000 each time you delete the card, making file management a freaking nightmare I still haven't resolved. Premiere CS5 supposedly edits native AVCHD, but it's rubbish. I wish I'd stayed with and upgraded FCS now, as I'm going to have to transcode anyway, to keep my files in check as much as anything. I'm using XDCam HD422 50Mbps, which is good, but not perfect - there is a slight degradation, but it has to be worth it, because native AVCHD is horrible. This is the BIG downside with Panasonic's AVCHD, in my opinion - nasty file management - impossible almost. The editing of AVCHD I can't complain about, as a faster computer with a CUDA card would eat it up I'm sure.

6. I am shocked to report that I used the 14-140mm lens exclusively for 2 days solid. I have Zeiss manual primes that I've had from the Canon 5D days, and I love them. Not only that but historically I've always said that I hate autofocus and zoom lenses, being a purist manual focus primes man. But on this shoot, I started off with the 14-140 as I needed a wide, and I just loved it. I didn't need short depth of field as the background was blacked out, creating highly focussed subjects anyway. Great lens. It did go hunting now and then, but I my friend Adam on the 60D fared worse focussing manually. I shot at 140mm a lot too - really great lens.

7. My GH1 image is very clean at iso800, which I shot at for most of the shoot. The 60D shot at similarly high iso settings, and I've seen more coloured pattern noise on his images than mine.

8. The Canon is much better built and the ergonomics are good, and there was a definite sense that I had a toy and Adam a real pro camera. The images tell a different story though.
Click to expand...
Yea you had a toy that right now is the hottest thing going and it's a generation old. I'll take the toy.
 
flinty said:
My GH2s footage is a nightmare to edit compared to a T2i/550D i had.
Click to expand...

How so? Originally a few months back I would agree, since you can kind of edit files straight out of the camera on a Canon with a reasonably fast computer.

But the 24p pulldown hack released last November helped a huge deal. Now all you need is FCP to support AVCHD.
 
mikecazzx said:
Yea you had a toy that right now is the hottest thing going and it's a generation old. I'll take the toy.
Click to expand...
GH13 holds a candle to the 5d and kicks any other canon DSLRs ass has been established for quite some time LOL. Very simply - Canon's are photo camera's that do video, Panasonic does video cameras that do photos.
 
Psynema said:
Very simply - Canon's are photo camera's that do video, Panasonic does video cameras that do photos.
Click to expand...

bang on. This is why I have both. one for video one for photo. Would love to combine video and photo into just one of them but in my opinion it doesnt quite work with either camera. Well, the GH1 is WAY off in the photo department and the 60D is not quite up to scratch for video.
 
For stills photography the 5D is pretty much the best camera in the world. Not just in terms of image quality, but also the pure pleasure of using it, but I do think that it is not ideal as a Cinema camera. This Lumix GH1 is utterly crap for stills compared to my old 5D Mk1, mostly because of the weird RAW format it uses (RW2) which I can't use. I just don't take any stills since getting this camera. I hate jpeg - it is a pale comparison to RAW for getting sweet photos.
 
Barry_Green said:
Not really. 35mm is the standard. Which is basically identical in size to the 60D, and the GH2 is just a little bit smaller. The Red is 35mm-sized, film is mostly 35mm, the F35 and Genesis and Alexa are not S35, but they're a tiny bit larger than 35mm-sized, etc.

S35 is talked about a lot like it's interchangeable with 35mm, but it's not, it's a little bigger.

The only cameras that I know of that actually have an actual, legitimate S35 sensor size would be the Red Epic-X, and maybe the F3 (it remains to be seen when they announce what the actual sensor dimensions are; from Bloom's comparison it looks like it's probably S35).
Click to expand...


The reason I use S35 because it is close to the 35mm used by film. When you just blindly say "35mm" you confuse people coming from the still frame world. People from the cinema side that see 35mm and people from the still side see 35mm and they both think different things, we continue to confuse people. So I'd prefer to at least use S35 which actually is a lot easier to understand and doesn't cause ambiguous confusion. It still doesn't change any of my comments though on lens selection between the m4/3 and EOS mounts at the moment :P
 
(And talking stills, that's why I still own my 7D, I love it as a stills camera. The 5D is awesome as a stills cameras as well)
 
grimepoch said:
The reason I use S35 because it is close to the 35mm used by film. When you just blindly say "35mm" you confuse people coming from the still frame world. People from the cinema side that see 35mm and people from the still side see 35mm and they both think different things, we continue to confuse people. So I'd prefer to at least use S35 which actually is a lot easier to understand and doesn't cause ambiguous confusion. It still doesn't change any of my comments though on lens selection between the m4/3 and EOS mounts at the moment :P
Click to expand...

I understood that. I use the term "Academy" where you use S35 to denote motion 35 as opposed to stills.
 
Lucas Adamson said:
This Lumix GH1 is utterly crap for stills compared to my old 5D Mk1, mostly because of the weird RAW format it uses (RW2) which I can't use. I just don't take any stills since getting this camera. QUOTE]

Get bibble - fastest RAW editor and has made editing GH1,Canon and Nikon RAW editing a breeze here.:happy:
Click to expand...
 
henryolonga said:
Lucas Adamson said:
This Lumix GH1 is utterly crap for stills compared to my old 5D Mk1, mostly because of the weird RAW format it uses (RW2) which I can't use. I just don't take any stills since getting this camera. QUOTE]

Get bibble - fastest RAW editor and has made editing GH1,Canon and Nikon RAW editing a breeze here.:happy:
Click to expand...

Thanks for that Henry. I have been using Aperture 1 since it came out and I love it, but it won't support GH1's RAW files. For that I need Aperture 3, which has terrible reviews regarding speed - it is VERY slow, or Lightroom 3, which I've tried and don't like, or as you say, Bibble. Another problem is that Apple don't like losing customers, so have made product migration away from Aperture an absolute pig to do. Sure, say Apple, migrate your 1000s of RAW files, we'll just keep back all the edits you made to them and make migration with them pretty much impossible. Why thankyou, Apple Corp., you B*st*rds!
Click to expand...
 
YEs, but Photoshop, in spite of the name and it's historic intentions, is not an application you want to process your camera RAW files in. Aperture and Lightroom were made because Photoshop is sooooo inefficient for processing the photos in the required way and efficiently.
 
You can edit GH1 raw files in Capture One, but unfortunately the camera isn't fully supported, so for example the focus mask doesn't work./
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top