havasuphoto
Well-known member
Colton, I used to have a GH1 with FPN at all ISO. Been thinking about trying another one since prices are so low. My first experience makes me worried. I remember FPN showed the most when shooting something white and flat like a refrigerator in very low light. Maybe you can try this with your 2011 model - some exposed properly and some under with Emery's setting on and off.
I've shot with my 2011 model, hacked GH17, and I get zero FPN shooting at ISO1600 on smooth, -2 everything. This is indoors, low light.
I've shot a bunch of little stuff here and there, and have yet to see ANY FPN-this is using the High Reliability patch.
EDIT; just shot some more indoor footage at SH(720/60P), and there is a small amount of FPN visible, if you look for it. I have a 30" LCD monitor running at 2560X1600-so it's easy for me to spot. However, if I render this clip down a bit, or reduce my monitor resolution, the FPN almost vanishes. And, I think this is at the extreme end of what you would be shooting at. 1600ISO is way up there, and for me to see so little FPN is amazing!!!
Quite frankly, I've seen much worse FPN and/or Moire, on other "big name" camera's at ISO800. So the FPN I have now, is easily "blended" away. And by "blended" I mean, reducing the contrast and softening the image a bit. Remember, I was shooting at the "smooth" setting, with all setting set at -2.
YMMV.
When shot at FHD, I didn't notice the FPN, at all. However, I have other "issues" with FHD. I need to reverse telecine my footage(apparently Sony Vegas doesn't do as good of a job as I thought), or, just switch to one of the two native patches. I'm also waiting on a faster SDHC card, as I'm currently shooting with a Class 4-so any break-up in the footage is likely caused by the card speed, and not the camera.
So, my testing will continue next week with the faster card.
I don't want to jump to the conclusion I did in my previous statement-"no FPN visible".......yea, there might be some-but, is it less than the earlier versions? Probably. But, I don't have one to compare it with, and watching the issue on You Tube, isn't a great way to compare-since You Tube has the famous "codec crusher" at work, you don't know if the artifacts are caused by the camera, or You Tube.
Last edited: