How does the image quality of the FS-100 compare to a GH3?

Michael Solomon

Michael Solomon

Well-known member
Disregarding low light sensitivity and sensor size.... How does the image quality of the GH3 compare to the FS-100? Strictly in terms of dynamic range, color rendition, and overall aesthetic

I've been struggling with whether or not I want to go with a BMC. The main restrictive points for me on it have been aliasing, what appears to be a more exaggerated rolling shutter, and most importantly, the lack of 60p. A lot of the work I do calls for 60fps. Right now I have a sony FS-100 and I just can't stand the way it handles highlights, the 8 bit workflow, and the overall image it produces.

I'm thinking that maybe the GH3 would serve as an alternative for those times that I'll need 60p. Do you think it would do a decent job of intercutting with the BMC? Would it hold up as well or better than what my FS-100 is currently producing?
 
Yeah, definitely go with a DSLR that produces an inferior image to the FS100 that seems like a great move! Whatever floats your boat.

It appears you've purchased a $4000 camera when you thought you were buying a $40000 instead. **** happens.
 
http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/Panasonic-Lumix-GH3-Digital-Camera-Review/Dynamic-Range.htm
this says the range is about 10 stops, so 1 - 1 1/2 stops less than the fs100 so will be harder to match. Recently sony said it was possible they "may" update the gammas on the fs100 to match the 700s cinegammas so it might be worth holding onto it for a bit longer and seeing if another firmware comes in the new year.
http://notesonvideo.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/blackmagic-resolve-sony-nex-fs700.html
 
Showman Media said:
http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/Panasonic-Lumix-GH3-Digital-Camera-Review/Dynamic-Range.htm
this says the range is about 10 stops, so 1 - 1 1/2 stops less than the fs100 so will be harder to match. Recently sony said it was possible they "may" update the gammas on the fs100 to match the 700s cinegammas so it might be worth holding onto it for a bit longer and seeing if another firmware comes in the new year.
http://notesonvideo.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/blackmagic-resolve-sony-nex-fs700.html
Click to expand...

Thats the dynamic range of the JPEG pictures as far as I know... Video should be less, right?
 
If they do include Cinegammas in an FS100 firmware update, that would drastically improve the FS100. I have the FS700 and the Cinegammas look great and it's just easier to use out of the box without tweaking a lot of profile voodoo for the highlights.

But the GH3 is only $1200, so why not just have both?
 
When looking at DR numbers you need to be a little careful. There's DR and then there's usable DR. Find reputable people who test the cameras and see what the real world figures come to. People like Adam Wilt, Barry Green come to mind as some examples of those people who's results have validity. Abel Cine also publishes a number camera tests, Mitch Gross know his stuff. There are others.
 
Noel Evans said:
When looking at DR numbers you need to be a little careful. There's DR and then there's usable DR. Find reputable people who test the cameras and see what the real world figures come to. People like Adam Wilt, Barry Green come to mind as some examples of those people who's results have validity. Abel Cine also publishes a number camera tests, Mitch Gross know his stuff. There are others.
Click to expand...

noel-

i would also add andy over at abel to the list.

be well.

rob
smalltalk productions
nyc
 
There's very few experts out there as far as I can see, just a load of go to guys for camera companies to sell equipment. Their job is to make you feel good about your purchase nothing more.

If it helps you to believe your FS100 has 11.5 stops of DR then AbelCine are your go to guys. If you want badly set knee and lope settings then their presets fit the bill too.

The only bloke worth reading is the BBC camera test dept chap, not sure if he's still going. But people don't want to read that their DSLRs are completely useless for TV work people would much rather read/hear that a bit of sharpening in post makes the 5D MkIII image almost usable.

These so called experts are also very good at making your camera seem inadequate in the face of new models and I wonder if that's behind the OP's dissatisfaction with the FS100?

Looking at the GH3 promo movie,https://vimeo.com/49420579, by the world's leading camera salesman you can see how poor it is if you bother to really look at it and understand what you're seeing. It quickly loses detail in the highlights and there's sign of a very aggressive knee in operation. The skin tones look like a turd from someone suffering with pancreatic problems and loads of rolling shutter. Make sure you take in the credits too, a lot of people were involved in squeezing that out.

It might be worth comparing Dermot's production before writing off the FS100 for a GH3.
 
I've been dissatisfied with the FS-100 for quite a long time but up until recently, there weren't really any alternatives in the price range. I'm not looking to use the GH3 as a replacement for the FS-100. I'm looking to use the GH3 as a b cam to the BMCC for when I need 60p and nothing more.
 
Michael Solomon said:
I've been dissatisfied with the FS-100 for quite a long time but up until recently, there weren't really any alternatives in the price range. I'm not looking to use the GH3 as a replacement for the FS-100. I'm looking to use the GH3 as a b cam to the BMCC for when I need 60p and nothing more.
Click to expand...

I have been using the camera settings Nirv posted a while back with very good results. Infact I am using them on a comedy short coming up in February that I plan to post here once it's finished, as of now we are currently in pre production finalizing the script, story board, shot list ect... I think what Nirv is saying is that the FS100 is capable of great work, but you have to learn how to use the camera. I myself am improving on every shoot, it's alot of work but what an awesome camera once you learn how to get the best out of it. I had to buy a V-LCD56MD Marshall monitor with waveform, false color ect in order to make the best of his settings. So basically I am loving this camera right now. It's still in my opinion the best value for the money, and there is plenty of work posted around to show that to be a sound opinion.
 
Last edited:
Once you work with 10 bit or raw, you really start to see the limitations in a camera like the FS-100. Beyond that, I've just never liked the way it renders skin tones or handles highlights, despite the multitude of picture profiles that I've sampled for it. I mean, don't get me wrong. It's a great budget camera and you can do a lot with it. And I have done a lot with it over the past year. I'm just at that point where I'm ready for something better and right now that looks like the BMCC. I'm lucky in the sense that when I usually get hired to DP, they'll provide the camera package as well. However, I also shoot a lot on the side for fun with friends and being that I usually get stuck grading whatever I shoot, I deal first hand with the frustrations that the FS-100 can induce.
 
I hear you, but I use davinci to grade my footage and it seems to hold up pretty well for me. I suppose if I was shooting something where I had to get all crazy with the grade it might be an issue, but that has not happened yet on anything I've worked on.
 
Last edited:
Michael Solomon said:
Once you work with 10 bit or raw, you really start to see the limitations in a camera like the FS-100. Beyond that, I've just never liked the way it renders skin tones or handles highlights, despite the multitude of picture profiles that I've sampled for it.
Click to expand...

i do have a ton of experence with RAW and 10 bit 444... from a few years ago when almost no one was playing with RAW;
http://digitalfilms.wordpress.com/tag/music-videos/


and i do know what the limitations of 8bit are, and work within them...

for the the film i am wrapping next week i had the choice of Alexa for 15 days or Epic for 20 days - i sold the producers and director on the FS100 after screening back to back tests and bought three of them and shot for 42 days... the FS was a great choice given 70+ pages shot at night

Really pretty-creamy skintones are something my FS100 delivers in spades, and i don't have any issues with highlight handleing either.. as long as i stay within 11 stops.. this when footage from the Hyperdeck is screened full range in a Di theatre with both a Christe and a Dolby 4200 refrence mon set to P3

i still think your PPs and post workflow might be holdng you back from getting the best from the camera

Come to think of it - the crap skintones, trashed highlights & noisy secondaries are the very reasons i balied from the fauxlog concept.. have you tried Nirv's or Pointcam's profles yet? Do you still see the same skintone and highlight issues with them?

My post chain is very specfic and includes input transforms ACES style - without that post gear my profiles are not going to be much help, they really are meant to work with my choice of post tools

As long as you don't need the lowlight performance of the FS and you can find fastish/wideish glass for the BMD it looks like a great tool - but it really falls of a cliff into a sea of noise long before the FS starts to breath hard...

Not a clue about the DSLR thingie, personaly i kinda avoid them after being scared by a close encounter with a 5D...
 
Last edited:
Dermot said:
Come to think of it - the crap skintones, trashed highlights & noisy secondaries are the very reasons i balied from the fauxlog concept.. have you tried Nirv's or Pointcam's profles yet? Do you still see the same skintone and highlight issues with them?
Click to expand...

The fauxLog BS has found its way over to the FS700 crowd. It gives you nothing only problems.

My profiles produce lovely skin tones ( assuming they've been exposed correctly) and clip with dignity. There's so much crap said about highlights on the FS100, I've never had an issue.

The FS100 community has been visited by all the bozos one could care to mention, those pointing a large chip camera with a fast lens at a bright window and not expecting sensor reflections and those wanting to point the camera into the sun while perfectly exposing the talent in silhouette while not using lights. But lets blame the camera because that's easy. Being a DP or cinematographer is about balancing light and fitting the scene into the range of the camera not vice versa. Umpteen stops and a RAW workflow does not mean you can leave your craft at home in bed.

The BMD looks like an interesting proof of concept. There's just so much wrong with it to make it a viable production tool although there will be those that use it. The main market will be pixel pervs who shoot cats and garden flowers and grade those shots in the giveaway Resolve. The BMD rolling shutter measured worse than a 5D MkII and this is a camera for motion capture! I'll wait for a F5 in a year or so.

Edit.

I asked my mate to send me over some skin tone images he shot with my original FS100 that he bought off me using my Grading PP. Since getting my second FS100 I haven't shot anything in the sun! http://wearenirv.tumblr.com/#39140624699 I think he's done a great job.
 
Last edited:
Nirv said:
The BMD looks like an interesting proof of concept. There's just so much wrong with it to make it a viable production tool although there will be those that use it. The main market will be pixel pervs who shoot cats and garden flowers and grade those shots in the giveaway Resolve. The BMD rolling shutter measured worse than a 5D MkII and this is a camera for motion capture! I'll wait for a F5 in a year or so.
Click to expand...

Measured the same as a 5DMKIII.

It's okay for people to want better color and more dynamic range. And it's okay for you to want to keep your FS100 and wait for an F5.

It's not okay to be consistently inflammatory on these boards. Please, a little less hostile in tone.
 
I don't take Nirv's statements as being hostile infact his statements are full of factual information, which is why I come to this forum in the first place. I learned more from Nirv, Postman,Kyle and Dermot than just about anyone on this forum, and if I believed all the statements that have been posted on this forum by people who don't know how to use the camera correctly I would have probably never bought one.

I would like to take a moment and thank all of you & a few not mentioned here for the knowledge contributed that helped a film student like me make good decisions on equipment. What I shoot now with the FS100 is much better than what I shot when I first purchased the camera. Learning the functions of this camera based on these contributors information is why this camera works for me as well as many others on this forum. They always post with factual information and not just opinion. Thanks
 
Last edited:
Nirv's comment "The main market will be pixel pervs who shoot cats and garden flowers and grade those shots in the giveaway Resolve" made me laugh as I've genuinely seen those shots being used to test camera's with. :tongue:

I suspect he's just got a naughty sense of humour rather than any malice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top