GH2 Is the hacked Gh2 seriously not blowing people away!!?

Sorry...DVXuser has always confused me on the image embeds.

Here is a direct download of a fullsize Mac OS screen grab:
http://ryanfarnes.com/images/Zion_National_Park.png

I was a bit limited by the time I had to prep for my trip, and my SD card on hand, but I should have shot with Driftwood's 176mb intra hack, but I am still really pleased with the results from cbrandin's 66mbit version. Watching it on my 23" monitor...it is just so crisp. Hands down blows the pants off what my T3i would have looked like.
 
karapetkov said:
Thanks Ryan.
Click to expand...

Моля.

I feel silly the MTS file will evaporate in a week. I really should get Vimeo Pro...I just feel like I post stuff rarely enough, a recurring $60/year feels annoying. I guess it might spur me to more action with video and posting stuff. Plus the quality would be better...camera tests would forever be downloadable with original file.

Hmmm...
 
downloaded the file. Looks really great. Very excited for my gh2 to come in, and then it's the wacky world of finding the right hack and understanding whta he hell this GOP thing means..

The footage handles well, but there is still quite a bit of banding in the sky when you curve it.
 
Kholi said:
What ISO did you use, Ryan?
Click to expand...

Must have been 160. I was stopped down to f/22 probably on the 14-42 kit lens, its maximum. I have a .9 ND filter, but I can't remember if I had it on at the time. All the bright daylight stuff I shot was always at ISO 160.

You asking does remind about how the banding apparently manifests itself below 640 (was it?)

I should do some more tests...and if 640 ISO is cleaner for banding, I need to get some stronger ND filters.
 
It's below 320

This is why I keep telling people not to shoot below 320 indoors or out. You need a ton of ND.

Broad Daylight, to shoot ISO 400, you need to stack .3, .6, .9 to shoot a 2.8~4 split I believe.

I guess it's high time I do a detailed post on this... and the other benefits of using ND.
 
I'm just getting into this camera, and the banding is an issue. Good to know it can be mitigated.

I'll be interested to try some tests between 160, 320 and 640 to see how the banding fares.

Despite it all though, I am still in awe of the image it produces. I can see why people get GH2 crazy. I've shot with the Panasonic 200 and 170, the EX-1 (which perhaps was the cleanest I've shot) and the Canon 7D/T3i....but I get the feeling that the hacked GH2 is the cleanest image I've ever shot. Once I get the banding figured out, the sky is the limit.

(pardon the pun)
 
Shoot at the lowest ISO's you can to preserve dynamic range and reduce noise (on almost every camera this is probably 160 or 320), then use ND's as needed to control your exposure (changing shutter speed can screw up how your motion appears, and stopping down past f/11 on most lenses can introduce chromatic aberration).
 
hendosan said:
Shoot at the lowest ISO's you can to preserve dynamic range and reduce noise (on almost every camera this is probably 160 or 320), then use ND's as needed to control your exposure (changing shutter speed can screw up how your motion appears, and stopping down past f/11 on most lenses can introduce chromatic aberration).
Click to expand...

Sigh...
 
Kholi said:
It's below 320

This is why I keep telling people not to shoot below 320 indoors or out. You need a ton of ND.

Broad Daylight, to shoot ISO 400, you need to stack .3, .6, .9 to shoot a 2.8~4 split I believe.

I guess it's high time I do a detailed post on this... and the other benefits of using ND.
Click to expand...

I use the fader variable ND filter, pricey but it gives me 8 stops. yes 8 stops.

i shot at .95 with my voightlander, middle of the afternoon sun shining in LA and I still had more stops left on my fader. I even filmed birds in the sky, mid-afternoon, sunny. My gh2 recorded some passing clouds with detail, yes the clouds were distinguished from the sky above the clouds. usually one would get a large blob of white.

iso 160
 
Hey Jay,

Can you post that clip MTS for us to check out? To see if the banding is wild or non existent?
 
regarding not shooting below 320, makes sense. More noise breaks up the banding so it would only be natural to shoot gradients above a certain iso to break it up.
 
PaPa said:
regarding not shooting below 320, makes sense. More noise breaks up the banding so it would only be natural to shoot gradients above a certain iso to break it up.
Click to expand...

That's the first thing.

The second thing is how the camera processes software ISO's as well. We don't know exactly which setting is the real native setting (at least I haven't seen any engineer give that info), and until we do, we won't know exactly how we should shoot.

Vitaly said, over on Personal View, they should give us this info or only give us the option to shoot native/hardware ISOs and I agree with him. You don't need increments, you need to either open up, use a slower shutter, ND down, or add more (take away) light.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top