Panasonic unveiled G1-HD...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kholi said:
This whole DOF thing is getting out of hand. I wouldn't be tryin' to shoot at a Vistavision sized frame (5D MKii) but I'm not too scared of a smaller FOV than 35mm.

it's still LARGER than 2/3" sensors, and plenty gets done with those.

Here are some RED Charts that show the differences of 4k, 3k, and 2k:

4K: http://www.mediafire.com/imageview.php?quickkey=bznumdnmrid&thumb=4
3K: http://www.mediafire.com/imageview.php?quickkey=5ptkitz3zrw&thumb=4
2k: http://www.mediafire.com/imageview.php?quickkey=f54onqxdh3j&thumb=4
Click to expand...
Kholi, I think I must nominate your name for one of next our training programs. :beer:

E. :-)
 
Now that we have that out of the way.

It all comes down to the quality of the 17Mbps AVCHD and low light performance for me. Any thoughts on color grading and a 35mm transfer? I'm using prores/fcp/color.
 
Robert Altman said:
This is only true because of the nature of the way the RED sensor is cropped--in general there would be NO specific relation between resolution and depth of field. It is optically related to the sensor size.

Showing the 3 crop factor pictures from the RED without letting us know what the F (or T)-stops are of course makes comparison difficult. At some point putting an F1.4 lens, wide open, on a large sensor will provide a shallower d DOF than a smaller sensor can possibly provide. The real question is--how shallow a DOF do you want?

My feeling is that the option to have the shallowest DOF is always good, and the 4/3 systems do represent a compromise. IF you can wait I am sure that we will have a well configured full 35mm dSLR that does what we want in the motion picture department.
Click to expand...

...... It's a good thing were talking about fov and not resolution. And red and not any other camera.

Now if you think you must have 35mm fov and dof cool. But you can't tell which one is s35 fov or dof? That's what my point was. At a certain sensor size the only thing that matters is wides. And I'd you never go wider than 17mm on an s35 system then 4/3rds is enough. I personally want 35mm fov so I can to wider than a 17mm equivalent. I often use the tokina 11-16 at the 11 end. :D
 
Everyone has been very prolific. The GH-1 definitely deserves the attention; it is the first hybrid DSLR designed to be as much a video camera as a still camera.

Some notes:

1) DOF: you can get good DOF on a 2/3rds camera with fast lenses. A 4/3rds should be no problem. It may actually be a happy medium. It will be able to get close to FF still 35 with work yet not be so extreme to make DOF difficult in day to day stuff.

2) Lenses: there are tons of lenses that fit and people have been doing it on the G-1 for months. You have manual control and the exposure meter works. The zoom in focus assist works well to help. There are actually some very good rangefinder lenses at lower prices than their FF 35mm counter parts.

3) Resolution vs. the 5DM2: both record 1920x1080. The Canon starts with 5700x1080, the Panasonic tbomk 3840x2160. Over sampling 3x vs 2x horizontally shouldn't cause an improvement; it is like recording audio at 35khz. Vertically, the GH-1 has higher resolutuion. As a side bar, the GH-1 is better in step with its optical low pass filter.

4) Noise: each photo site is bigger on the Canon, but there are more of them (8Mp vs 6Mp) on the Panasonic. In the end, the Canon has about 60% more effective sensor area. That is much less than you would expect; an FF35 normally has 300% more effective sensor area. It is more though, and although the Panasonic sensor may handle video better, the Canon probably handles light better. CMOS sensor technology in still cameras is a Canon strength.

5) Skew: All row-by-row scanned CMOS sensors have skew. It is reduced by reducing the time to scan the rows. Canon seems to have kept it to reasonable levels. Panasonic, so far, has not. Let's see what the production cameras are like.

6) Compression: this has been the issue we have debated; as we now understand it the Panasonic will have 2.5x more compression than the Canon. More than a Canon SX1, SX200, SD780, 500D, HF S10/100, HF20/200. More than an HMC150. The perfect groom found naked in the closet with the maid of honor just before the ceremony.

7) HDMI: we don't know but hope for the best. The first people to get their hands on one will end the mystery. If it is live HDMI output, which the Canon's don't have, there will be solutions for serious prosumer users. Not cheap solutions, but still workable solutions.
 
Davies point about dog coincides with my own. Vistavision or full frame is too much for tastes. U also think that the gh1 sensor might be avert happy medium. If you want shallow you go IDE open and light to spec. But consider this: in daylit shots you will need to stack the he'll out of new to shoot wide open for paper thin depth on a full frame system or 35mm system. You do that less with the 4/3rds because of it's smaller sensor and dof characteristics.

You also must consider cmpositition and camera placement from subject. This is the main reason why these dof worries are a bit nonsensical. You have much more ro to scoo back from your subject with the tiny cameras which means a bit mote freedom to compose to taste.

It's had to really think on the terms unless you've bee. In those situations. I have.

Evey one of those stills is at 3K. No 4K or 35mm fov or dof.

I know some red shooters that can tell. But partnof the reason is because I forgot abpi tv sensor crop and should have been isn't an 85m instead of a 135mm. You Adjust. And your audience will probably never be able to tell the difference once you go beyond 16mm fov or 2/3".

Relax peoples. Dof is enough on this cam. Fov? Well. If your a Wide freak like me you might take a bit to adjust. LOL.
 
it doesn't sound like live HDMI. The documentation keeps referring to "playback"

I really wish they had have pushed it to 24Mbps, but a few people have noted that it's not noticeably different except for some artifacts in fast motion footage.
 
yeah I like big ass glass too but the oly 14-35mm F/2 should do me for now. There's always the panny 7-14mm a bit slow though at f/4
 
Too much slow especially for that sensor size IMO. With adaptors, you can surely add other glass options. Not on the wide end though. David has summed up the whole thing, actually. Nothing more we can add for now.
 
Emanuel said:
Too much slow especially for that sensor size IMO. With adaptors, you can surely add other glass options. Not on the wide end though. David has summed up the whole thing, actually. Nothing more we can add for now.
Click to expand...

Agreed. The widest application I can see happening is the 11-16mm Tokina Nikon to 4/3" adaptation. Outside of that, too slow to work with. And even THAT is pretty darn slow, man.

=(

That is about the only complain I truly have with the system, the rest is just wait-and-see.
 
HDMI can be the key or end of road at least for me, if it won't provide a proper/better codec.

A few curiosity on the skew issue as well, even though I'm fear the higher pixel density per a smaller sensor can bring a harder outcome comparing with the 5D Mark II especially on its behaviour in order to handle with the light parameter, as David wisely pointed out.
 
wow, that looks really good. Now its just a question of finding a really wide, fast lens that isn't over 2 grand....
 
cause many of us like to shoot other times than just when we have paying gigs :) I am a hobbiest and a professional, so i would need to have at least lenses in my arsenal.

I like my work like i like sex, random and spontaneous. But if it's been a while, then scheduling times to shoot are okay too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top