GH2 Have a feeling the 5D Mark III's video quality won't come close to the hacked GH2s

dtjohns1 said:
Depends on if his statement was about image quality or popularity. We all know that GH2's aren't the popular kids in school but when did name recognition mean better performance?
Click to expand...

It was whether they are a "competitor". In the market place, no the GH2 is not a competitor with the 5D line. The Full Frame Nikons are it's competitors. The GH2 is a competitor with the NEX and the Nikon "Cool Shot" or whatever their new small body interchangeable lens cam is called.

We can argue all day about which is "better" as a "motion picture camera". I will never convince you and you will never convince me, so that road is pointless.
 
flinty said:
Not realy known some other sites go through dozens of questions and points on the GH2 a day.
Click to expand...

We are gear heads... who get on internet camera gear head boards. we are a tiny, tiny, tiny fraction of the "film making community". I know a LOT of DPs, editors, actors, directors, producers, grips, etc.. the vast majority, I mean like 85% have never even heard of the GH2, but they can recognize a 5D/7D the second they see it.
 
nigelbb said:
Who cares? The 5D is a stills camera & the vast majority of purchasers are stills photographers. The video is a nice to have feature & Canon need to keep it for bragging rights now that Nikon has delivered somewhat decent video on their professional still s camera. The GH2 is not a competitor to the 5D Mk II or III except among a very small number of filmmaker wannabees who cannot afford to buy or rent proper professional equipment.
Click to expand...

Lets keep the conversation civil, guys. This can easily be a heated topic and we will more than likely all have our own biased opinions to share. As long as we proceed tactfully, this can be fun, educational and entertaining. Otherwise, it can easily become trollfest 2012 in here.
 
gonzo_entertainment said:
We are gear heads... who get on internet camera gear head boards. we are a tiny, tiny, tiny fraction of the "film making community". I know a LOT of DPs, editors, actors, directors, producers, grips, etc.. the vast majority, I mean like 85% have never even heard of the GH2, but they can recognize a 5D/7D the second they see it.
Click to expand...

You are right about that.

Usually the response to recognizing a Canon camera on set (in LA) is this:

=[

By about 70 percent of that 85.
 
nigelbb said:
Who cares? The 5D is a stills camera & the vast majority of purchasers are stills photographers. The video is a nice to have feature & Canon need to keep it for bragging rights now that Nikon has delivered somewhat decent video on their professional still s camera. The GH2 is not a competitor to the 5D Mk II or III except among a very small number of filmmaker wannabees who cannot afford to buy or rent proper professional equipment.
Click to expand...

It isn't a competitor at all in stills, you're right. And, you're actually pretty much right about why DSLRs shooting video is popular. I did understand what you meant (or I assume), which was DSLR video in general, not just the GH2.

And honestly, that's mostly true. I dunno about wannabees being the right term, a lot of the people using DSLRs are actual, factual filmmakers or producers. I've done plenty of serious (broadcast) gigs on DSLRs in my time, same thing with 35mm Adapters, same with RED etc. I know quite a lot of people that have as well.

But yeah, DSLR video's popular because, well, it's affordable. Anyone denying that's kind of delusional.
 
Ian-T said:
Knee + Grow + Please!!!!
Click to expand...
I should have put a smiley face next to this.

But I do understand the point of popularity amongst professionals. The GH-Xs were never meant to be professional tools. And we all know how aggressive Canon is with their marketing. In a lot of ways I believe the GH-Xs are/were an accident. But it's not to say many pros are not already using them. I found the comment to be a teeny-weeny-bit condescending towards those who are making a living off this camera. But...to each his own.
 
Just have to passively ignore the troll-and-runs. =B There are certain people that will only post once in a thread to get a rise then vanish.

They are easily identifiable. So just don't respond.
 
Meanwhile, I'm really a lot more interested in seeing where the T4i goes. An affordable moire-free APS-C sized cinema cam? I think THAT's a lot more likely to be a competitor with the GH2 than the latest 5D is.
Especially if the rumors are true about the kit lens being silent autofocus in movie mode. I'll bet it will still be limited to 4GB clip sizes (since they could have done that all along and chose not to until now), so the GH2 will likely still win in that regard. But native canon glass with IS, s35mm-sized FOV, more accurate color in camera... all while offering proper image resampling for moire-free true HD? What's not to love? If they keep the current Rebel pricing and Magic Lantern gets ported in, I'm very much going to buy one.

...to add to my collection, of course. I'll don't see myself giving up the GH2 anytime soon. :)
 
How could anybody not be excited over a new DSLR, especially one like the 5D which has the possibility of bringing some monumental improvements to the scene. I mean... this is OUR niche, DSLRs. If there was an actual video camera on the market that for a few grand threatened the gh2, maybe some people would get defensive over their choice and investments made in supporting their camera. But the 5D, Gh2... all of the DSLRs really, are very similar and very easy to transition from one to another... in terms of gear and support. We should be welcoming with open arms ANYTHING that can topple this bad boy. I mean why not? DSLR bodies are relatively cheap, easy to sell and hold their value very well when compared with expensive cameras like the AF100 / FS100 etc. I hope the 5D turns out to be a must buy, but if it sin't, that definitely won't be a bad thing.
 
from what i remember, the main reason the dslrs have problem with autofocusing on video is due to the hardware itself.
thats why the mirrorless G, NEX & etc. have more mount pins than usual for autofocusing. (m43 has 11pins as to dslrs with 8)

ive read this article back when pansonic released the g1. i wouldnt know where to find that article.

so t4i having autofoucsfor video would be a welcome but unlikely to happen.
 
nigelbb said:
Who cares? The 5D is a stills camera & the vast majority of purchasers are stills photographers. The video is a nice to have feature & Canon need to keep it for bragging rights now that Nikon has delivered somewhat decent video on their professional still s camera. The GH2 is not a competitor to the 5D Mk II or III except among a very small number of filmmaker wannabees who cannot afford to buy or rent proper professional equipment.
Click to expand...

M. Gilden said:
Lets keep the conversation civil, guys. This can easily be a heated topic and we will more than likely all have our own biased opinions to share. As long as we proceed tactfully, this can be fun, educational and entertaining. Otherwise, it can easily become trollfest 2012 in here.
Click to expand...

I own a GH2 a 5DII & a 600D (T3i) amongst other cameras. I use all three of them for video & two of them for stills. They all have their good & bad points. I use them because I can't afford an Alexa or an F65. If I buy a C300 I probably won't use any of them for video any more except perhaps 5DII as B-camera.

I wasn't aiming to be provocative just pointing out that some of the posters here are just a wee bit too blinkered about their own little field of interest to recognise that currently decent video on stills cameras isn't much more than a happy accident. It's certainly not the main focus of the camera manufacturers. The fact that even Nikon who don't have a pro video camera market to protect haven't produced a cheap large sensor video camera with decent ergonomics probably indicates that the market is too small for them to bother with or at least sales would be too small to recoup the R&D whereas the millions of point & shoots that they sell make the majority of the profits.
 
Camera comparisons are just by nature somewhat subjective as well. I love.. I mean LOVE the look I get from a full frame sensor. It is perfectly suited to what I am trying to do visually in my films. Other people would be fighting against aspects of the camera I totally embrace and work with, just as I would be if I used a small sensor DSLR. To each his own.
 
It may not be a main focus but it's here now and these manufacturers are starting to pay attention to it. Why else would Nikon put all that money into producing a proper short film to showcase the D800's movie features along with including clean hdmi out, emphasis on minimal moire and aliasing (heck they made two versions just for this), etc. Even in their point and shoot commercials and for the Nikon J1 or something like that with Ashton Kutcher the whole commercial focused on the movie recording mode instead of stills. The mix of high quality stills and video in one body is what the general population along with "wannabes" on these gearhead forums want. It's clearly evident.
 
Last edited:
dtjohns1 said:
The mix of high quality stills and video in one body is what the general population along with "wannabes" on these gearhead forums want. It's clearly evident.
Click to expand...

I don't think so. I think most DSLR-video crowd don't really care that much about the photo side. Sure, they'll dabble in it and play with it from time to time. What the gearheads want is a large sensor, interchangeable lens camera for $2k and under.
 
nigelbb said:
I own a GH2 a 5DII & a 600D (T3i) amongst other cameras. I use all three of them for video & two of them for stills. They all have their good & bad points. I use them because I can't afford an Alexa or an F65. If I buy a C300 I probably won't use any of them for video any more except perhaps 5DII as B-camera.
Click to expand...

I think you were just pointing to the F65 as an example...

F65.jpg


It has the post workflow of a high end camera from the year 2000. And it is HUGE. Although it feels great on my shoulder, too bad 250GB of storage = 10 minutes of footage.

I'm probably gonna shoot my first project with it in about three weeks if I can convince some people to go through with the garbage post flow. xD The things we do to get great footage.

C300's a pretty nice image, I must say, but to get the best out of it you're putting it through a full color session post flow (at the moment) which means you still have to convert to DPX/4444 etc so on and so forth. The stuff you're pulling off of the camera's pretty much reference/proxy to cut with.

I am sure someone will come up with a "custom" profile for C-Log adjustment that's more a straight-to-client delivery look... it's gonna be needed.
 
dcloud said:
from what i remember, the main reason the dslrs have problem with autofocusing on video is due to the hardware itself.
thats why the mirrorless G, NEX & etc. have more mount pins than usual for autofocusing. (m43 has 11pins as to dslrs with 8)

ive read this article back when pansonic released the g1. i wouldnt know where to find that article.

so t4i having autofoucsfor video would be a welcome but unlikely to happen.
Click to expand...

That'd be the first I've heard of it. I was under the impression that the problem mostly stemmed from the lenses not being designed for it, and thus being slow and noisy.
Magic Lantern, meanwhile, uses some basic metering math to enabled autofocus on current Canon hardware. I tried it on my T2i with a Tamron 17-50mm, and it DID work, however was too slow and noisy to use for anything serious (I believe the camera body also noticeably vibrated during the whirring, which appears in the footage). I have heard that USM Canon glass was better suited for it, however I don't have access to any to say for certain.

Meanwhile, I don't know what the "extra pin" would be used for, exactly, in this situation. I mean, the electronics are totally different from mount to mount- on an EOS, you likely have a pin to control aperture, whereas the Nikon G lenses have a physical level that is moved. Also, since the Panasonic lenses are focus-by-wire, another pin may be required to send signals in both directions on that account. Either way, I wouldn't be so quick to say that the reason Canons can't autofocus has to do with a limited number of pins!

But, to be fair, it is also entirely possible that these new lenses can have a slightly extended interface in order to identify to the camera that this lens is autofocus-capable. Older EOS lenses would not have a pin there, and therefore not interface with that part of the camera. But this is all speculation.
 
Auto focus in video mode means nothing to me as a feature, but there might be significant improvement if the rumored "DIGIC-4 devoted to nothing but auto focus" rumor is correct.
 
gonzo_entertainment said:
Auto focus in video mode means nothing to me as a feature, but there might be significant improvement if the rumored "DIGIC-4 devoted to nothing but auto focus" rumor is correct.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, I tend to hate it myself unless I'm using a Steadicam or other situation that I can't touch the camera during a shot. It was a selling point for many on the GH2, however, so I'm just mentioning it to show that Canon plans on this being a new generation of hardware for video shooters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top