Revenge of the Great Camera Shootout Pt2 - Beyond the Alphabet

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
Wolfenbarg said:
I do wonder how people will react to this test overall. Will people suddenly lust after the cameras that produced the image they liked best? Or will they defend their camera until the death, even going as far as to claim that the DP or colorist were incompetent? I know I'll personally be more inclined to pay closer attention to whatever cameras produced the image I liked best as well as whoever lit those scenes.
Click to expand...

Sport, politics, religion, cars, consumer electronics andwhatnot - it all is the same effect.
Defend your decision of fanboyissm till you drop - it's more a psychological problem than a technical one.

A whole industry makes a living on that and only a few of us are brand agnostic.
Why? Don't know the answer to that. Maybe evolution at work.

Frank
 
EndCredits said:
As much as i would love to have an f65 can you imagine the limitations that come with it due to its size and complexity, I bet it would make you lust after a DSLR some times :)
Click to expand...

I do have to say that I appreciate the image quality I can get out of a GH2 given how small it is. Sometimes I prefer a bigger camera, but sometimes the GH2 is amazing in what quality can be squeezed out of that petite form factor.
 
Yak said:
I agree in blind tests as well as the image that DSLRs can produce, but remember it is not just the final image that matters, how a camera works on the set also matters how easy is it to set up, what codec does it record in..... So it is not only the finale image it is also how do you get that image. The great news is that it is now possible to create a great looking movie with more affordable gear and as it has always been true having large budgets backed by large studios does not mean that the final movie is worth watching.
Click to expand...


?
A dslr can be set up and easier to record than a Red or Arri, an iphone even easier... Final codec matters? When, how what circumstance? Facebook, youtube iphone footage is more than enough..... What truly separates projects is the concept, directing, art set, etc. Lighting is much more important than any camera & a great camera operator/dp is going to make the project shine & know when it's best to use such tools.


Canon dslr suffer from moire and aliasing, but shooting in neutral profile and using dof you can really eliminate a lot of the problems, but what a Red be better? At the end of the day I feel Dslr technology will be king, give it 2-3 more years and many of the problems will be gone.
 
vision_filmz said:
Canon dslr suffer from moire and aliasing, but shooting in neutral profile and using dof you can really eliminate a lot of the problems, but what a Red be better? At the end of the day I feel Dslr technology will be king, give it 2-3 more years and many of the problems will be gone.
Click to expand...
You are sort of talking against yourself there, saying that DSLRs are good, but you have to shoot with shallow dof. Which basically means no wide angle lenses, or stopped down normal ones. I'd say that's a big obstacle for creative looks that require more stuff in the frame for example.

Anyways, my predictions are, and what gave it away for me (hope I'm right :D ):
A = Sony F3
B = GH Hacked, choppy motion
C = C300
D = Iphone
E = F65
F = Epic, detail in the shadows, and skin tones that I didn't like
G = Cannon 7D
H = Alexa, best skin tones
I = Some crap

All and all I would say that E, F, H are really good, and that A comes in ahead of C, then after that it is pretty crap (compared to the top).
 
All-in-all, the only camera I got right was the Alexa and the Iphone. In retrospect (which in my estimation is worthless in a blind test) this portion of the shootout is really a grading demonstration, but you have to admit the GH2 punches above its weight-class.
 
LyleGorch said:
All-in-all, the only camera I got right was the Alexa and the Iphone. In retrospect (which in my estimation is worthless in a blind test) this portion of the shootout is really a grading demonstration, but you have to admit the GH2 punches above its weight-class.
Click to expand...

The only ones I was confident in picking ahead of time were the iphone and the 7D.

I had a feeling B was the GH2, because the shimmering pattern on the woman's zebra shirt... I've seen that effect a lot on GH2 footage. The only reason I was unsure about it was because other than that, it looked too good for what I thought the GH2 would do.
 
Last edited:
The actual results

H - F65. #1 I give it #1 because they didn't change with lighting and took only 30 minutes in post processing. Good skin tones.
F - Alexa #2 Great DR

From here on all are pretty close

A F3 #3
C Epic #4
B GH2 #5
E C300 #6
I FS100 #7 .. DP could have done better. Shame
G 7D .. #8 Aliasing
D Iphone .. #9 obviously worse
 
Wow. To hear Francis Ford Coppola say he put down B, C, and F right up at the top was a real kick, as those 3 were my top 3. Very cool. [My original guesses]

My order was B, F, C, E, F, H, I, D, G, A. (Oh, and I thought correctly about D being the iPhone. Still can't believe I put 7D and F3 at the bottom.)

I was happy to learn that GH2 was B, although I'm not that surprised, since it's what I use these days (when I'm not using a Panny HPX camera). I suspect my familiarity with the GH2 look is why it felt right to me....

Now, I sure would love it if Coppola shot his next film using the GH2.
 
Funny how different the perception among DPs is. A was my favorite and I disliked B and the iPhone the most.
 
Postmaster said:
Funny how different the perception among DPs is. A was my favorite and I disliked B and the iPhone the most.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I disliked B, to me it just something with the motion stutter and sharpness of it.

I thought the Alexa would be best, so I put that as H, but turns out that was the F65, which turned out to be really good, my favorite. As they also said, they didn't tinker with the scene, now that's a camera. Then for some reason I had the Alexa down as having bad skin tones, when I usually like shows shot on it because of skin tones highlight drop off. But it did have a lot of detail in the shadow areas.

Epic in my eyes turned out to be ranked 4th for me, the three ones above being all a notch better and more even, H F E.


Also, this whole idea of power windowing and grading removes much of the quality of the test.

As one of the guys pointed out about the iPhone which I think is great was him saying that you shouldn't say the iPhone looks great, it looked like crap in comparison and it took them a lot of effort to reach that level of crap. Sure, it is cool that phones and cheap cameras are getting to that point where they are good, but it is annoying as hell when friends and producers think it should be shot on x-camera because it is so cheap and looks "just as good as a professional camera". It's like thinking I should replace my actors with people that just look right, not understanding all the skills (tools) that proper actors have.

I want a camera that I can get good results with fast, that I don't need to spend hours color grading faults, or limit scenes DR, etc. to make it good. Sure, I can do those things, I can use a camera to its limits and trying to max out as much as possible from it, but on a set, time is money, and it takes time to "compensate" for the lack of quality some cameras have, which makes the whole Sony F65 more awesome (but then again, I will not have any money in a foreseeable future to by that, but a GH2 is well within my reach).

Wexler is awesome, he is the only I feel that give true and non BS advice, I've met and worked with him in real life a couple of times and he is just as brilliant in real life as in this web series. The others I feel are trying too hard to say profound statements. Finally I would say that when asked about what cameras is best its all about, for what? I chose camera based on the story and budget, if I want a super 8 feel, then why not shoot super 8, if I want "digital" then I get a digital camera. I've taken cameras that are "worse" (even when I have had access to much more expensive and "better" cameras) because they fit the story, or maybe they have better lenses for what we are shooting, etc. I don't know about you guys but I make or order food after what I feel like suits me that day, not what cost the most or have the most mega vegetables in it, why isn't that the thinking behind camera choices?
 
High1ander said:
Also, this whole idea of power windowing and grading removes much of the quality of the test
Click to expand...

I think it does and it doesnt - to me its all about cost, if thats the cheapest way to the result then great..

Den 'popped' a 400 joker into the FS100 shot to add fill - not a light I (or most FS100 owners?) can afford

To me its about the equation, and sweet spots, for example an FS100 and a couple of Jokers cost the same as an F3 with a couple of 2ks, (or suchlike) which might make the F3 cheaper..

Lighting and crewing a lot of fill costs money, but so does complex post, trade offs everywhere

I spose I would like to see maybe three scenarios* and work out the cost, you might be able to shoot Scarlet+reflector and need an FS100+genny+Joker, to get a good ratio on a midday shot

Each camera has a cost to actually use.. and the bigger the scene the more filling up the light ratio costs

S

*maybe..
Midday desert shot
Streetlight night scene
Indoor with windows in frame
A massive tungsten ballroom/conference centre
 
Last edited:
keylight said:
Now, I sure would love it if Coppola shot his next film using the GH2.
Click to expand...

Who knows if he'll do that. But he was very impressed by it at the screening. And when he found out it was only $800, he was considering getting one for his wife to some of her own videos on. :)
 
morgan_moore said:
I think it does and it doesnt - to me its all about cost, if thats the cheapest way to the result then great..

Den 'popped' a 400 joker into the FS100 shot to add fill - not a light I (or most FS100 owners?) can afford

To me its about the equation, and sweet spots, for example an FS100 and a couple of Jokers cost the same as an F3 with a couple of 2ks, (or suchlike) which might make the F3 cheaper..

Lighting and crewing a lot of fill costs money, but so does complex post, trade offs everywhere

I spose I would like to see maybe three scenarios* and work out the cost, you might be able to shoot Scarlet+reflector and need an FS100+genny+Joker, to get a good ratio on a midday shot

Each camera has a cost to actually use.. and the bigger the scene the more filling up the light ratio costs

S

*maybe..
Midday desert shot
Streetlight night scene
Indoor with windows in frame
A massive tungsten ballroom/conference centre
Click to expand...
That's why I think it is important to note that for example the iPhone required such low DR to function. Good luck shooting outside and being able to afford large silk screens to cast a nice soft shadow over your whole scene if all you can afford is an iPhone. Again, really cool that Sony F65 didn't do any adjustments to the setup, but how sick wouldn't it have been if GH2 could say the same?

To me it doesn't matter how great a cheap camera can look if that is based on really expensive lighting equipment and time consuming color correction. If it on the other hand will look amazing on real life scenarios with little to no corrections, then that is awesome.
 
How the hell did they manage to include aliasing in ALL of the scenes with every camera? They screwed up the in the editing room apparently. No one is watching these in 1080p?
 
Postmaster said:
Funny how different the perception among DPs is. A was my favorite and I disliked B and the iPhone the most.
Click to expand...

Same here. I shoot with the GH2 all of the time and end up with images that I absolutely love and here I am staring at a shot that makes me disappointed with the camera's performance. Actually, let me re phrase, it was just not the best match between lighting and the camera's abilities.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top