Zacuto Shootout (GH1 specific)

Melvin Harris

Melvin Harris

Black Flag Member
I honestly didn't think that the GH1 would hold up to a direct comparison, straight up, with the other cameras, but I am very surprised with how well the little guy did. There were some things about the camera that did bother me, seeing it like this, but no more than finding out your super hot wife farts in her sleep. I mean, who cares, she's super hot, right! I know now for a fact that I made a great purchase for my shooting style and my aesthetic sensibilities and I can use all of the FD glass that I have acquired over the years with little troubles (I bought the Rainbow Adapter) which I can't do with other offerings. I have no doubt that this camera will allow me to do great things...

However...

I did see the tremendous value in the Canon offerings. Seriously, there were things that were just out right better (like the 11 stop compared to 9 stop range), and there were things that I appreciated more now that I got a chance to see them.

But back to the Panny.

Here's a quick 3 questions-

1. For anyone who saw the test, how would we control the banding from the light bulb's highlights and lessen the "halo" around the bulb in a scene where the practical is that close to the talent?

2. Philip Bloom mentioned not being able to optimize the GH1's color profile- does anyone see this as a particular problem?

3. What were your thoughts on the test?
 
Last edited:
pharpsied said:
I honestly didn't think that the GH1 would hold up to a direct comparison, straight up, with the other cameras, but I am very surprised with how well the little guy did. There were some things about the camera that did bother me, seeing it like this, but no more than finding out your super hot wife farts in her sleep. I mean, who cares, she's super hot, right! I know now for a fact that I made a great purchase for my shooting style and my aesthetic sensibilities and I can use all of the FD glass that I have acquired over the years with little troubles (I bought the Rainbow Adapter) which I can't do with other offerings. I have no doubt that this camera will allow me to do great things...

However...

I did see the tremendous value in the Canon offerings. Seriously, there were things that were just out right better (like the 11 stop compared to 9 stop range), and there were things that I appreciated more now that I got a chance to see them.

But back to the Panny.

Here's a quick 3 questions-

1. For anyone who saw the test, how would we control the banding from the light bulb's highlights and lessen the "halo" around the bulb in a scene where the practical is that close to the talent?

2. Phillip Bloom mentioned not being able to optimize the GH1's color profile- does anyone see this as a particular problem?

3. What were your thoughts on the test?
Click to expand...

Yeah the whole thing about not tweaking its profile bothered me. Because you can optimize it. On default settings the Canon's usually come out more contrasty than the GH1 but they clearly tweaked them and it looks like they just threw the GH1 up there on defaults. It surprised me that it looked so contrasty...if you shoot on Normal or Smooth mode, on -2 Contrast, on +1 Sharpness, on -2 Noise Reduction, and on 0 Saturation I know from experience that it looks much more like the way they made the Canons look...particularly on the tub scene.

That thing that Steve said about the GH1 "people think this looks amazing but it's really sharp and contrasty" is sort of the main reason why I feel people think the Canons look good when the settings haven't been tweaked! I am trying to get Philip Bloom to let us in on which settings he used for the GH1, because it doesn't look quite right.
 
Ben_B said:
That thing that Steve said about the GH1 "people think this looks amazing but it's really sharp and contrasty" is sort of the main reason why I feel people think the Canons look good when the settings haven't been tweaked! I am trying to get Philip Bloom to let us in on which settings he used for the GH1, because it doesn't look quite right.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 
seeing how i can't edit my post, i do want to point out that they sure do love them some canon's and have a lot of nice things to say about them ;)....wonder why.
 
Ben_B said:
... the GH1 ... It surprised me that it looked so contrasty...if you shoot on Normal or Smooth mode, on -2 Contrast, on +1 Sharpness, on -2 Noise Reduction, and on 0 Saturation I know from experience that it looks much more like the way they made the Canons look...particularly on the tub scene. ...
Click to expand...

Hi Ben: Sorry, but I don't understand the point you're making here. Are you saying using these settings on a GH1 would be a good thing?
 
I think canon and panny are both worthwhile for different reasons. Everyone raves about the smooth setting for the gh1, but I've always had better luck with Nostalgic. Image looks noticeably brighter and less contrasty and seems to allow for better CC in post.
 
Was the test really fair to the GH-1? They should of tweaked the settings like they did with the Canon's. I don't have either a Canon or Panasonic GH-1 but to me the GH-1 looked more like video while the Canon's looked more like film which in video's i've seen it's the other way around. It's not really a fair comparison if they didn't tweak the GH-1 settings.
 
Crimson_Fluid said:
Was the test really fair to the GH-1? They should of tweaked the settings like they did with the Canon's. I don't have either a Canon or Panasonic GH-1 but to me the GH-1 looked more like video while the Canon's looked more like film which in video's i've seen it's the other way around. It's not really a fair comparison if they didn't tweak the GH-1 settings.
Click to expand...

Very true.
 
Rory_B said:
I think canon and panny are both worthwhile for different reasons. Everyone raves about the smooth setting for the gh1, but I've always had better luck with Nostalgic. Image looks noticeably brighter and less contrasty and seems to allow for better CC in post.
Click to expand...

Exactly! I posted about this awhile ago. The setting ( Nostalgic ) has a very flat contrast, however I never see it used.


Michael Pappas
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms
http://www.PappasArts.com
http://SumeriusChronicles.com/
http://TheOrbisTerrarum.com/
http://www.facebook.com/PappasArts
__________________
 
Careful, I got banned for 3 months for

Careful, I got banned for 3 months for

Car3o said:
seeing how i can't edit my post, i do want to point out that they sure do love them some canon's and have a lot of nice things to say about them ;)....wonder why.
Click to expand...

even eluding to such things.

This is what I didnt get with PB's original push with the 7D, but I do concede that apart from the fact there is no AF( a big big pain for many) on all the dslr's the 7d and 5d sensor's are a little bit more filmic than the GH1. However, the GH1 is certainly no slouch and if they add some pro-features more robust codec then there would be even more GH1-2 buyers, the evf and take anywhere package is unrivalled to date.

Update.!!

Just watched these clips btw, my goodness the GH1 looks the best!! by a long way on the low ISO's. If they had used an equivalent fov, ie an 2 or 2.8 lens the dof and so called filmic nature would of been brought out more, am sure. Am amazed they didnt fit the 45mm f2.8 pl macro, what a lens that is and would of only been f5.6 in equiv to 5dmk2 as shown-demonstrated. So as it was shown rather biased and very amateur in fact, these guys are pro's I thought! some of the f stops where at f4(5dmk2, and some at 5.6 equiv 7d,(aps-c) and actually f8 on the gh1, no wonder people think the others looked more filmic, and still the gh1 looked the best imo. If they had narrowed the dof equiv. lower, say tried the 25mm f1.4 at f2(f4 equiv on full frame), or an FD mount at f2 or other legacy glass to equalise these differences, then the GH1 may in fact of of been even better than the others? increased sensitivity for one thing.
 
Last edited:
Honestly.... They all looked GREAT in the test. The only real noticeable issue with the GH1 for me was the halo around the light bulb. Otherwise it looked great and held it's own through out the test.

The funny thing about shootouts like this... Unless you actually do a side by side of each camera you wouldn't know which had a batter image. It's not like you are comparing a SD VX2000 and a HDSLR... That difference would be obvious even if it weren't in a side by side.

You compose your shots, light properly and *tell the story* and the tool you use to do it matters very little.
 
Yes agreed, but they should of at least been 50mm f4 on the 5dmk2, 35mm f2.8 on the 7d and 25mm f2 on the GH1, then all things are equal, if they dont even know the basics then how the heck can they show theses things, they look idiots and then to make a film of it, even bigger idiots. My estimation of these guys was already low and now they have an audience hanging on their words when they dont even understand the crop factor and dof effects these lenses have on different sensors, its a joke.
 
Tameside said:
Yes agreed, but they should of at least been 50mm f4 on the 5dmk2, 35mm f2.8 on the 7d and 25mm f2 on the GH1, then all things are equal, if they dont even know the basics then how the heck can they show theses things, they look idiots and then to make a film of it, even bigger idiots. My estimation of these guys was already low and now they have an audience hanging on their words when they dont even understand the crop factor and dof effects these lenses have on different sensors, its a joke.
Click to expand...

If they used the same Zeiss lens on each cam, as they seem to indicate, then the problems with the dark face in the candle lit scene could be due to the fact that on the GH1 you would have to be farther away to get the same framing. (2x crop on GH1, 1.6 crop on 7d, and zero crop on 5d). If they did this then this "test is slanted against the GH1 for more reasons than not adjusting the setting properly.

Now think of the same thing with the bathtub test, the halo around the bulb will be heightened by being further away so the light bulb is more of a point source. Although this is probably not enough to account for the halo.

What effect does being further away have on the rest of the tests? If they are asking us to look at the detail in the window and the tub will that be affected by being further away? What about differences in shadow and highlight detail?

And do not forget what Tameside is pointing out in his post, that with different sensor sizes you have different depth of field resulting in different compression of detail. That afffects the results when they are asking us to look at detail.

This is supposed to be the best testing the cams. We did not get the technical best. Felt like it was a the best only for the Canon that Bloom does so well, and the film that the DPs live with, the rest were just thrown in a manner that a amateur would use them. So it was a test of more than cams. It appears that it was a test if a Pro can get better results than an amateur. It appears that Pros can. (Moderators please allow me this little bit of sarcasm.)

Having said all of that this just points up one of the principal advantages of the Canons, so many pros use them that a huge body of knowledge and accessories support anyone who want to optimize results.

As for the GH1, Pannie do not wait until Photokina for the GH2 or you will be left in the dust.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top