GH2 Hacked GH2 Impressed in the new Zacuto shootout
- Thread starter DBP
- Start date
It's the best script ever written! Will make for some great reel material that other Craigslist producers with no money will go hogwild over!
ErikTande
Well-known member
Small production companies rent RED Epics all the time, it's well worth the cash. Up to 300FPS, amazing color and dynamic range, huge resolution, etc. The resoltion and color are worth it alone for heavy post production.
I love my GH2, it's amazing for what it is. But if I had the budget for a Red Epic I would get one in a heartbeat.
I love my GH2, it's amazing for what it is. But if I had the budget for a Red Epic I would get one in a heartbeat.
keylight
Veteran
Not quite. Hollywood cares about that "extra" bit. And if I have a client that wants/needs that extra bit then they'll get it (it'll cost them of course). But for most people working with smaller budgets (or for me that means within most corporate video budgets) cheaper is better. (I use an HPX-370 for most corporate work, btw.)
As for camera-companies-are-scamming-you.... Nah. Not my line of thinking with cameras (or audio gear and lighting). But do I think Zacuto gear is over-priced for what they offer vs what is available from competitors? Absolutely. And that was sort of the point of my post, although I suppose could have been lost in the way I wrote it.
Cory Braun
Well-known member
We're getting off topic, but Zacuto's customer service makes it worth every dollar. I have dealt with the less expensive companies and their customer service ranges from absolutely horrible to serviceable, but Zacuto goes above and beyond any time I need their help. And that's why I gladly "over-pay" for Zacuto.
Skeptikal
Active member
The Zacuto Screening in Adelaide that I went to had a lot of pro gear and most of the tested cameras on display in the foyer. The Zacuto rep was there to introduce the screening...but that's it. I don't remember seeing anyone hawking Zacuto gear even though they would have been entitled to display some.
Of course in the bigger picture Zacuto's tests are a marketing exercise. Who cares. That's the way the system works. Most grown-ups can make their own purchasing decisions without being overly influenced by different marketing strategies.
To attack the Shootout because it was marketing motivated is rather disingenuous. I personally have zero interest in their gear.
" Acquisition of a camera such as the Alexa or Epic is a strictly business decision. You look at what the equipment costs, and what you can expect to receive from it, and you make your decision on that basis...Pixel-peeping a GH2 or FS100 against an Epic is just a silly and pointless exercise."
Really? Two points:
Most people think in terms of production requirements in the studio/benign environments. That's reasonable. But...the game I'm in requires 100 percent reliability (and multi-camera redundancy) in regions far removed from any service or repair facilities (e.g my recent Maluku - West Papua 4 week diving expedition). The last time I heard of a RED being used in that region (Indonesia) underwater it melted in it's underwater housing after a couple of weeks. The operator was a very experienced cinematographer who has done several recent IMAX movies underwater...he talks about it on his blog.
So sometimes the big ticket items just can't be relied upon for remote area expeditionary work. Which brings me to my second point. Even though my production house can easily afford high-end cameras...they just don't suit what we do. So it's good to confirm what we already suspected... our hacked GH2's and the way we use them can produce acquisition that comes close to the image quality of much larger and less reliable (in the field) cameras (and I have no interest in 4k yet).
Of course in the bigger picture Zacuto's tests are a marketing exercise. Who cares. That's the way the system works. Most grown-ups can make their own purchasing decisions without being overly influenced by different marketing strategies.
To attack the Shootout because it was marketing motivated is rather disingenuous. I personally have zero interest in their gear.
" Acquisition of a camera such as the Alexa or Epic is a strictly business decision. You look at what the equipment costs, and what you can expect to receive from it, and you make your decision on that basis...Pixel-peeping a GH2 or FS100 against an Epic is just a silly and pointless exercise."
Really? Two points:
Most people think in terms of production requirements in the studio/benign environments. That's reasonable. But...the game I'm in requires 100 percent reliability (and multi-camera redundancy) in regions far removed from any service or repair facilities (e.g my recent Maluku - West Papua 4 week diving expedition). The last time I heard of a RED being used in that region (Indonesia) underwater it melted in it's underwater housing after a couple of weeks. The operator was a very experienced cinematographer who has done several recent IMAX movies underwater...he talks about it on his blog.
So sometimes the big ticket items just can't be relied upon for remote area expeditionary work. Which brings me to my second point. Even though my production house can easily afford high-end cameras...they just don't suit what we do. So it's good to confirm what we already suspected... our hacked GH2's and the way we use them can produce acquisition that comes close to the image quality of much larger and less reliable (in the field) cameras (and I have no interest in 4k yet).
Last edited:
I've been following this a bit on here, and reduser and thought I'd put in my two cents.
If there is a limited budget, I would think using a camera that is good enough for the job and worrying about being able to pay a great DP/ crew would be the smart thing to do.
I mean, if I could afford an Alexa and a crew, that's what I would use. But I can't, so I have a GH2. Yeah, it's nice to see that it can compare to other cameras in the right hands under controlled circumstances, but honestly if I had the money to use something else, I would.
I have access to a Red MX where I work, but I chose to get a GH2 for myself because I can handle, operate, and transport it by myself. I can operate the Red by myself, but honestly, who wants to have to do that...
If there is a limited budget, I would think using a camera that is good enough for the job and worrying about being able to pay a great DP/ crew would be the smart thing to do.
I mean, if I could afford an Alexa and a crew, that's what I would use. But I can't, so I have a GH2. Yeah, it's nice to see that it can compare to other cameras in the right hands under controlled circumstances, but honestly if I had the money to use something else, I would.
I have access to a Red MX where I work, but I chose to get a GH2 for myself because I can handle, operate, and transport it by myself. I can operate the Red by myself, but honestly, who wants to have to do that...
keylight
Veteran
What? Someone attacked the Shootout because it's used for marketing?
Not true. A few of us identified the marketing aspect of the whole "test" but I don't think anyone here was negative on the tests BECAUSE they're used for marketing.
That's silly.
I think the genius of the Zacuto test is the blind unlabeled portion of the screening. Having read Ilya Friedmans account of when several people picked the unlabeled footage of the GH2 as the best footage, who when they found out it was Gh2 footage, retracted their pick. That says a lot. That portion of the test puts everyone and specifically the established professionals in a precarious position because if they picked the $600 cam it just might blow their whole world apart and they might see it as hurting their reputation as arbiters of quality image making. That part of the test is what i believe scares people and maybe the reason for Francis kennys implosion. Ilya in his post said " several people BRAVE enough to give their best of picks" (emphasis mine). Thats what that test did, maybe inadvertently Zacuto put a line in the sand and made veteran cameramen fearfully step over it
Last edited:
jdesignhi
Well-known member
I know a guy in Hawaii who owns an Alexa. I do not know if that camera has ever even been to Hawaii. There is so much work for it, that it spends all of its time in transit from one job to the next, on the continental U.S. It is a nice business for him.
Skeptikal
Active member
I was referring to comments made elsewhere...but I should have clarified that. By any standard the usual discussions here are quite balanced and civil compared to some other forums...
Skeptikal
Active member
Very well put...I agree completely.
I liked Ilya Friedman's article and linked it in the ongoing thread I started at Wetpixel about the Adelaide screening. He also made the valid point that some of the digital artifacts that were obvious in the cheaper cameras were probably only obvious to people sitting nearer the screen.
In the screening I attended there was only one comment from an experienced pro that came across a bit like sour grapes...although he made a valid point about banding on the GH2 (largely avoidable if you know what to do). Several other highly experienced ACS members were glowing in their praise of the GH2 material...even though they weren't likely to use one themselves. After the screening I spoke to a RED Epic owner and an Alexa user (their cameras were part of the hardware display that evening). They both thought that the GH2 looked great but were in no way threatened by that. Obviously they were comfortable with their own skill and equipment choice...
Ryan Farnes
Well-known member
I'm not surprised to see the GH2 do so well in a blind test. The first time I saw Driftwood hacked GH2 footage on a 1080p monitor, I was amazed. It was what I had thought the 3K Scarlet would look like. It is easily the cleanest and clearest image I have ever shot.
keylight
Veteran
From Kholi over at Personal-View.... (I'm assuming it's DVXUSER Kholi):
http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/comment/62932#Comment_62932
Ian-T
Veteran
All the info on every camera and how they shot the scene for each camera on that Zacuto shoot can be found here:
http://www.zacuto.com/zvideo/RGCSO-TechnicalCameraDocumentation-V1.pdf
http://www.zacuto.com/zvideo/RGCSO-TechnicalCameraDocumentation-V1.pdf
keylight
Veteran
Alas, not all..... They don't state which picture profile they used and any changes made to that profile:
[TABLE="width: 400, align: left"]
[TR]
[TD]Camera
[/TD]
[TD]Format
[/TD]
[TD]Compression
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]iPhone[/TD]
[TD]Filmic Pro[/TD]
[TD]24Mbps h.264 MOV[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]GH2[/TD]
[TD]Quantum B v9[/TD]
[TD]150Mbps AVCHD MTS[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]7D[/TD]
[TD]Technicolor Profile[/TD]
[TD]h.264 MOV[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]FS-100[/TD]
[TD]Custom Profile[/TD]
[TD]AVCHD 28Mbps[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]C300[/TD]
[TD]CLog[/TD]
[TD]50Mbos XF MXF[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]F3[/TD]
[TD]SLog 4:4:4[/TD]
[TD]10bit DPX[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Epic[/TD]
[TD]Red Raw[/TD]
[TD]7:1 R3D[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Alexa[/TD]
[TD]s.two[/TD]
[TD]Arriraw[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
They give profile information (in the "Format" column) for all the cameras except the GH2 and FS-100. (A slight digression/question, but shouldn't "Quantum B v9" actually be "Quantum v9b"?)
What they don't give is the profile. For all the other cameras, they use the Format column to give the profile information. So they probably should rename "Format" to "Profile", and rename "Compression" to "Format/Compression" in v1.2 of the technical specs.
Even though it didn't contain profile info, thanks for the link. It was very interesting nonetheless....
I've just been to the London screening - here are my thoughts.
My overall impression was how similar the cameras looked – with the exception of the iphone and the Canon 7d.
The iphone of course stands out – though not nearly as much as you'd expect.
As many people said – in some ways it was the biggest surprise of the day – it was actually watchable on a big screen.
The 7d was better, but not by that much! Clearly softer than the others and with poor shadow detail.
All the other cameras were, to my eyes at least, in the same ballpark. In the non-blind test where all the cameras use the same lighting setup you could tell that the more expensive the camera, the better the dynamic range. Other differences were subtle.
Then there's the blind section where they could relight for each camera. For the lower end cameras that presumably meant reducing the Dynamic Range. That made it much harder to tell apart and meant there was more of a subjective factor as different DoPs took different approaches.
The iphone was easily identifiable and no one liked the 7d. The FS100 also did pretty badly – several people picked it out and didn't like it. All the other cameras looked great. The GH2 was in several people's top 3.
When it came to the reveal, the GH2 definitely got the biggest reaction of surprise. Sadly I saw at least one person changing their vote after the GH2 had been revealed – they'd originally put it top. But even so it had clearly done well.
I hadn't actually chosen the GH2 shot in the blind test. I thought the shot looked technically good but the look didn't grab me – it was too clean somehow. I actually guessed it was the RED. Ironically, the shot I did like best was the real RED one. Arri looked lovely too.
But really what it showed is that we were responding to aesthetic choices made by the DoP and in grading.
One person summed it up well by saying you had one class which was clearly ahead – and the differences between them are very subtle – and then the B cameras that are still good but not in the same league. I don't think he realised when he listed the top class cameras that the GH2 was one of them!
Anyway, it was a fascinating exercise – well done to all involved.
My overall impression was how similar the cameras looked – with the exception of the iphone and the Canon 7d.
The iphone of course stands out – though not nearly as much as you'd expect.
As many people said – in some ways it was the biggest surprise of the day – it was actually watchable on a big screen.
The 7d was better, but not by that much! Clearly softer than the others and with poor shadow detail.
All the other cameras were, to my eyes at least, in the same ballpark. In the non-blind test where all the cameras use the same lighting setup you could tell that the more expensive the camera, the better the dynamic range. Other differences were subtle.
Then there's the blind section where they could relight for each camera. For the lower end cameras that presumably meant reducing the Dynamic Range. That made it much harder to tell apart and meant there was more of a subjective factor as different DoPs took different approaches.
The iphone was easily identifiable and no one liked the 7d. The FS100 also did pretty badly – several people picked it out and didn't like it. All the other cameras looked great. The GH2 was in several people's top 3.
When it came to the reveal, the GH2 definitely got the biggest reaction of surprise. Sadly I saw at least one person changing their vote after the GH2 had been revealed – they'd originally put it top. But even so it had clearly done well.
I hadn't actually chosen the GH2 shot in the blind test. I thought the shot looked technically good but the look didn't grab me – it was too clean somehow. I actually guessed it was the RED. Ironically, the shot I did like best was the real RED one. Arri looked lovely too.
But really what it showed is that we were responding to aesthetic choices made by the DoP and in grading.
One person summed it up well by saying you had one class which was clearly ahead – and the differences between them are very subtle – and then the B cameras that are still good but not in the same league. I don't think he realised when he listed the top class cameras that the GH2 was one of them!
Anyway, it was a fascinating exercise – well done to all involved.
Ian-T
Veteran
Thanks for that write up Nathan. I’m glad the GH-2 did as well as it did.
I don't have any doubt that all of these cameras could hold their own on the large screen. The thing about tests like these though is when folks start comparing this or that cam against cams that are ten times its price we are going to see some obvious differences. But, if people were to watch a well-executed movie on the big screen that was shot entirely on a 7D none of this would matter (think “28 Days Later”). Then again, it seems, that is not what this Zacuto test was all about. What they did was show me that the Pro vs.consumer gap nowadays is so thin there’s just no more room for excuses.
I don't have any doubt that all of these cameras could hold their own on the large screen. The thing about tests like these though is when folks start comparing this or that cam against cams that are ten times its price we are going to see some obvious differences. But, if people were to watch a well-executed movie on the big screen that was shot entirely on a 7D none of this would matter (think “28 Days Later”). Then again, it seems, that is not what this Zacuto test was all about. What they did was show me that the Pro vs.consumer gap nowadays is so thin there’s just no more room for excuses.