GH4 Suggestions for low light companion for GH4

Lintel said:
My lenses are fine thanks. I have lights - I wasn't always able to use them.

I'm looking for camera suggestions really guys. Thanks.
Click to expand...

We all saw some very good footage shot with the BMPCC. Surely a fine camera doing a very decent job in low light. But it seems to me that the main problem for many (at least from what's posted on Vimeo and other sites) is stability. Getting seasick watching all these hand-held shots. Maybe BMPCC + stabilizer (?) or tripod (space requirement)...

L.
 
DPStewart said:
...The 6D with Magic Lantern will output a clean HDMI signal to a regular old cheap Ninja too, thus bypassing the internal compression and giving an image that to me was like ten times better in low/practical lighting than the hacked GH2.
Click to expand...

Wait, what? I have a 6D and if that's possible I'll order a cheap Ninja as well. I thought that wasn't possible, every site I read about said that you still couldn't get a full pixel readout over HDMI. Are you sure??? If so, what ML firmware version are we talking about?
 
Lintel, your expectations are terribly unrealistic. I'm also questioning your workflow if the BMPCC is giving better low light results than the GH4.

If you shoot with an effective stop of f/1.4, ISO 2400 and cineV you will be able to out perform anything in this price range other than the sony's with native glass on them. Even a 5D3 at ISO 6400 will not out perform this combo if you compare equal DOF. Full frame cams have such shallow depth of field that they are virtually useless at anything under f/2.8. Add the incredible softness of the image at those high ISO's and the GH4 with some software noise reduction looks immeasurably better IMHO.

On a side note, I also concur that the A7s colors are horrific IMHO. Particularly at super high ISO's.

Cheers,
Pete
 
The A7S isn't bad when used at realistic ISOs. The problem with any camera at high ISO is that just because the luma information is there, the chroma information usually isn't.
 
For low light, the A7S is the answer. The stock profiles can be greatly improved with tweaking, and post latitude is surpringly good. I can now match A7S to 5D3 RAW. Doesn't get much better than that for color and low light.
 
I suggest getting the BMCC Speedbooster which I have for my GH4 and BMPCC. It gives 1 1/3 stop boost. It virtually makes the GH4, I dare say, comparable to the 5D Mark II in low light; moreover, 1 1/3 stops less than the A7S.

This makes my Sigma 18-35 f1.8 lens equal to a full frame f2.8 zoom. At 1600 it equals to what I see. The plus is that it can also work with your BMPCC. Just be aware that it could scratch not your sensor, but the glass that's in front of it.
 
For those talking about F2.8 used as target on movies... F2.8 is shallower on S35 than it is on M43, while also letting in more light.
 
Lintel said:
Interesting idea, thanks. Canon DSLR's in general haven't really benefitted from HDMI-out. Does the 6D output a full pixel readout via HDMI? If not I don't think I could get past the soft image and moire. Especially next to my GH4. I'd shoot 5D3 RAW if it was practical for work, but it just isn't.
Click to expand...

Well, if you are willing to include a DSLR, the Nikon D750 looks pretty promising.

I nearly forgot about the NX1, but having only h.265 is likely to be a pain.
 
stoneinapond said:
Perhaps it's the language, but are you suggesting that an f/2.8 lens delivers more light depending on the sensor size?
Click to expand...

I believe he means that with m4/3 it's possible to shoot one-stop wider than S35 (or two-stops wider than 135 format) & maintain a similar depth of field. This calculation presumes utilizing lenses with an equivalent field of view for each format.
 
Last edited:
filmguy123 said:
For those talking about F2.8 used as target on movies... F2.8 is shallower on S35 than it is on M43, while also letting in more light.
Click to expand...

Yes, but many people, including the original poster, use their GH4 lenses with a speed booster which makes them about equal with s35.
 
mcbob said:
Even in "dark" situations, simply shooting one light into the ceiling (dimmed to taste) to raise ambient levels can do wonders. A Lowel light or F&V4000 1x1 LED is a lot cheaper than another camera body and its attendant accessories, if budget is really an issue... and the result will look far better than the washed out, desaturated blech produced by a gained-up anything in low light.
Click to expand...

I did actually do this in the situation I'm talking about, but I couldn't make it too bright because it was the relaxation/meditation segment of the yoga class which is usually either completely dark (no lights at all) or just a few candles. I couldn't interfere with the class more than that. I'm probably going to just really crush the noise out of the footage I got and make it look like it was really dark, leaving only highlights visible.
 
novoluc said:
We all saw some very good footage shot with the BMPCC. Surely a fine camera doing a very decent job in low light. But it seems to me that the main problem for many (at least from what's posted on Vimeo and other sites) is stability. Getting seasick watching all these hand-held shots. Maybe BMPCC + stabilizer (?) or tripod (space requirement)...

L.
Click to expand...

I have no idea what this has to do with my thread. I had the BMPCC locked down.
 
Lintel said:
...I couldn't interfere with the class more than that.
Click to expand...
Granted, this comment will be for future situations...

...but, why? Did the business owner hire you to do this shoot to promote their business? In that case, I'd think they'd want the best representation of the product possible to SELL it, not document it like a news story. Given this situation in the past, I've had a conversation with the business owner: "I'm afraid I'll be unable to get a good image in this light, but with mild backlighting it will look beautiful. After you run through this potion with your customers, could we persuade them to run through a bit of it once more with some extra lighting?" The owner could then work that out with their patrons so that all sides leave happy... you get useable images, the business gets an attractive promo, and maybe the customers get a ~5-10% discount on their next session for going along with the shoot.

I used to shoot with an HVX200, so lighting was never optional or avoidable. Unless it's news/event/documentary, there's always a way to talk lighting into the circumstance.
 
c3hammer said:
Lintel, your expectations are terribly unrealistic. I'm also questioning your workflow if the BMPCC is giving better low light results than the GH4.

If you shoot with an effective stop of f/1.4, ISO 2400 and cineV you will be able to out perform anything in this price range other than the sony's with native glass on them. Even a 5D3 at ISO 6400 will not out perform this combo if you compare equal DOF. Full frame cams have such shallow depth of field that they are virtually useless at anything under f/2.8. Add the incredible softness of the image at those high ISO's and the GH4 with some software noise reduction looks immeasurably better IMHO.

On a side note, I also concur that the A7s colors are horrific IMHO. Particularly at super high ISO's.

Cheers,
Pete
Click to expand...

Hmm I think 'terribly unrealistic' is perhaps a bit strong. I just wondered if there was a mirrorless camera I'm unaware of with low light performance in the ballpark of the 5D3. But it seems we have different experiences of the GH4's low light ability. I haven't had the camera that long so I'm still testing - but I have done extensive low light tests. Why Cine V? I'm tending to favour Neutral with contrast all the way down ATM.

The other thing I should have mentioned is I would also like to get *decent* (i.e. not astounding) low light performance at 50p for slowmo (so downscaling 4k on the GH4 doesn't work for that).

For my taste I am indeed getting superior results in low light from the BMPCC. The noise is just much less invasive than the GH4's (which is very fine-grained downsampled from 4K but still very aggressive). But I'm still open minded about it - like I say I'm not yet fully acquainted with the GH4. I'm also not too keen on relying on Neat. As wonderful as it is, it's a nightmare for workflow/getting a job done fast.

I' be happy if this thread became a discussion of GH4/BMPCC low light settings though - I'm leaning toward making the most of these two cameras (native speed booster on the Pocket, perhaps Ninja Star on the GH4 for 10bit prores).

Thanks, Matt
 
yslee said:
Well, if you are willing to include a DSLR, the Nikon D750 looks pretty promising.

I nearly forgot about the NX1, but having only h.265 is likely to be a pain.
Click to expand...

Yes I think the D750 is looking like my best option (though I'm leaning more toward improving my current kit now).

The NX1 is so similar to the GH4 it doesn't make too much sense to me. It's low light ability isn't that different either (worse in fact at very high ISO's!).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top