GH3 More low light tests, seems a 2.8 lens is not really quite fast enough;(

@J.F.R. All true - S35mm is about a 1.5x crop (the APS-C used on some Nikons) vs full-frame while M43 is a 2.0x crop vs. full-frame. All of those are a lot closer to each other than they are to most standard ENG cameras up until very recently, not to mention the overwhelming majority of camcorders. No disagreement with you there. :)

I just meant that if someone is expecting massive improvements over the GH2 (which already was doing remarkably well for the sensor size minus a few intermittent bugs like the occasional "shadow flicker") that they were ignoring the combination of how much the camera had already improved over previous ones and where it was in relation to other crop sensors.

Take a look at the RAW stills output at ISO 6,400 on a Canon 5D (2008 1.6x crop), Canon 7D (2009 1.6x crop), Panasonic GH2 (2011 multi-aspect estimated 1.86x to 2.00x crop) and Panasonic GH3 (2012 2.00x crop).
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/stu...483&y=-0.11602821378186605&extraCameraCount=0

The GH3 sensor is 17.3 mm wide and the 7D is 22.3 mm wide. In other words, the 7D sensor is around 28.9% wider. The GH3 showing is quite respectable keeping that in mind.
 
Per Lichtman said:
@J.F.R. All true - S35mm is about a 1.5x crop (the APS-C used on some Nikons) vs full-frame while M43 is a 2.0x crop vs. full-frame. All of those are a lot closer to each other than they are to most standard ENG cameras up until very recently, not to mention the overwhelming majority of camcorders. No disagreement with you there. :)

I just meant that if someone is expecting massive improvements over the GH2 (which already was doing remarkably well for the sensor size minus a few intermittent bugs like the occasional "shadow flicker") that they were ignoring the combination of how much the camera had already improved over previous ones and where it was in relation to other crop sensors.

Take a look at the RAW stills output at ISO 6,400 on a Canon 5D (2008 1.6x crop), Canon 7D (2009 1.6x crop), Panasonic GH2 (2011 multi-aspect estimated 1.86x to 2.00x crop) and Panasonic GH3 (2012 2.00x crop).
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/stu...483&y=-0.11602821378186605&extraCameraCount=0

The GH3 sensor is 17.3 mm wide and the 7D is 22.3 mm wide. In other words, the 7D sensor is around 28.9% wider. The GH3 showing is quite respectable keeping that in mind.
Click to expand...


2 Reasons why as of now I left Canon 5D, 7d, 60d etc.....

Lack of detail in wide shots and not the best 720 60fps.

GH3 while not as low light sensitive allows me to shoot in 1080 60fps and gives me details in wide shots. No matter what I did when shooting with Canon I could NEVER get the detail I can with Panasonic.
Yes Canon has nice skin tones, great colors, low light, etc. BUT detail and 60fps is what made me move.


I did a Music Video with 10 people in front of the camera with Cars in the background and the lack of detail was very poor, Never again.....
 
Making 9PM evening look like mid afternoon daylight is not exactly how you would shoot dark scenes anyway.
Cinematographers often shoot day for night. But cameras need light. Shooting night for day doesn't work. :cheesy:
I don't see any issues with the low light performance that would bother me. Seems to do quite well all in all.
 
J.F.R. said:
I would say having f/ 0.95 lenses opens an amazing world. Even 1.4 lenses. Since the GH3 sensor is smaller you need fast glass. I have Hyper primes and love them. The GH3 is no C300, I would say to look into F /2.0 lenses or faster.
Click to expand...
Are you shooting locked-down on a tripod? If not, good luck keeping your subject's eyes in focus at f0.95!

J.F.R. said:
For about $100 you can buy 3 led hand held lights and light up any scene with the GH3...
Click to expand...
Crappy light is brighter but usually not better than what's available on location. If you can see well enough to focus, you can find a way to shoot it:

 
Lpowell said:
Are you shooting locked-down on a tripod? If not, good luck keeping your subject's eyes in focus at f0.95!


Crappy light is brighter but usually not better than what's available on location. If you can see well enough to focus, you can find a way to shoot it:
Click to expand...

???

So any future development on the GH3 hack......

Last time I was on any production we used tripods, I mean is it so insane to believe that we used them... I mean please forgive me if film making no longer includes using sticks.......
Lastly I just shot a video with many parts at .95, but that's not the point of this thread. Having a fast lens and being able to use it around 1.4,1.8 is all many of us were trying to say. F /2.8 while good you need faster lenses for the GH3.
 
J.F.R. said:
Last time I was on any production we used tripods, I mean is it so insane to believe that we used them... I mean please forgive me if film making no longer includes using sticks...
Click to expand...

Tripods are essential when you need them, but for a live event shoot where you can't use a dolly, the fixed, unvarying perspective of a tripod is too confining. That clip was taken with a monopod. With multiple subjects moving around on stage, I need at least f2.8 to keep them in focus, though I really prefer f4.
 
Lpowell said:
Tripods are essential when you need them, but for a live event shoot where you can't use a dolly, the fixed, unvarying perspective of a tripod is too confining. That clip was taken with a monopod. With multiple subjects moving around on stage, I need at least f2.8 to keep them in focus, though I really prefer f4.
Click to expand...


That event has stage lighting, very different than what the OP used for his scene.

This is something I would consider use of a Hyper Prime lens and even then places of light was still used, but this shallow dof and certain shots cannot be done on an f /2.8 lens 12-35mm lens.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top