Zacuto Shootout Part 3?

philip bloom said:
I have no idea where this notion that we used the kit lens came from? We used Zeiss Primes on all the DSLRs including the GH1. For the GH1 we used a 4/3 mount Zeiss F1.4. Not sure of the focal length...I would have to check as it was not my lens.
Click to expand...

Thanks for clearing that up... kudos on a very well-run test!
 
Tameside said:
Just correcting you, plus you now know a 50mm on GH1 will be same as 7d prety much. Also GH1 is not a dslr;-)
Click to expand...

but it's not!! I have both and my 50mm Zeiss on my gh1 is def more telephoto than my 7D!! I promise you!

Also DSLR will stick for GH1 for as I hate the other terms being used!
 
philip bloom said:
OK, let me talk about a few things here. First off when dealing with chips this size MM matter. Secondly you are making guesses here but most importantly...

Who cares! stop pouring off specs and numbers and just shoot with them! I don't care what the resolution is of the camera as long as I get great pics from it and I can get great pics from any DSLR!!

This was the only time I shot any charts in bloody months and have no desire to do it again. For me a test is how the image looks to me and how the camera is to operate. Two of the most important things FOR ME. Am sure many will disagree and insist on pouring over charts and specs. That's fine, but I will be out shooting whilst you do that ;)
Click to expand...

YES!!

:)

That's why I like the GH1....great image, and very easy to operate (for a camera like this.)

Really looking forward to GH2 but more so to the AF-100...exciting times ahead!
 
philip bloom said:
but it's not!! I have both and my 50mm Zeiss on my gh1 is def more telephoto than my 7D!! I promise you!
Click to expand...
Yes, but I think the point they're making is that the difference is much less than everyone initially thought. Initially we thought the difference was 22mm vs. 17mm, for a difference of 27%. Now we know that it's actually the difference from 22mm to 19mm, for a difference of only 18%. Instead of it being a "1.3 crop", it's actually a "1.18 crop".

So yes, the GH1 will be a little more telephoto than the 7D, but not nearly as much as originally thought. It's a lot closer to a 35mm film frame than a lot of people think.

Also DSLR will stick for GH1 for as I hate the other terms being used!
Click to expand...
Agreed. "LIVE" or "EVIL" are just goofy. Especially when one tries to portray "DSLR" as somehow being "superior" when, for video work, being a "DSLR" is actually a drawback. All being a "DSLR" means is that you lose the use of your viewfinder when switching to video mode.

So DSLR can mean "digital single lens reflex" for those cameras that have a mirror box, and it can mean "Digital Still and Live Recording" for those that don't have a mirror. :thumbsup:
 
All the cameras looked good. I would use any one of them. I can see why the 5D shines. Just happens I got the GH1 first after reading Barry's article. Some DPs don't like the sharp look of HD and soften the image anyways. It doesn't matter what frying pan you use to fry an egg, just as long as it frys the egg.

We Mac people used to exhaust ourselves running around saying "Macs are better. It's not fair!" Then look for celebrities using Macs to validate our purchase! But yes, it would still have been nice to have one person say the GH1 stuff looks good !

Robert MacLachan ASC is a big advocate of the GH1 and has convinced many directors into being GH1 users. They wanted to use the GH1 to shoot scenes in Human Target, not just as B cam, but it didn't happen. ( Maybe when the GH2 comes out? ) Now I feel better!
 
jleo said:
Robert MacLachan ASC is a big advocate of the GH1 and has convinced many directors into being GH1 users. They wanted to use the GH1 to shoot scenes in Human Target, not just as B cam, but it didn't happen. ( Maybe when the GH2 comes out? ) Now I feel better!
Click to expand...

Should probably clarify this statement. They used GH1 for B-roll and wanted to use it for some main stuff but didn't get to.
 
philiplipetz said:
.. and if they have to move the GH1 backwards to get the same FOV then less light is striking the GH1 sensor and the comparisons are no longer valid since you are comparing well lit Cannons with less well lit GH1s. This is especially relevant in some the earlier tests.
Click to expand...

This is not true. Subject to camera distance does not affect exposure signifigantly unless you are so far away you are experiencing atmospheric haze.
 
philip bloom said:
as i said. i was not present at that large screening but to be honest it's most likely because the Canons excite more people in the film business and that's simply a fact. Also the Canons gave a more pleasing image in every test. It was only in low light that the Nikon became a wow. The panny was always generally a so so...
Click to expand...

The problem I had was viewing they whole shootout on the Internet. Other than some of the 'latitude' tests, where the lightbulb was clearly 'better' in the film version, I was pretty much of the opinion... 'everything was the same'...

Is there a 1080 version that is downloadable and hence burnable to something that better displays the 1080 material?
 
philip bloom said:
I don't care what the resolution is of the camera as long as I get great pics from it and I can get great pics from any DSLR!!
Click to expand...

I agree, but the Zacuto test part 3 was called "the Resolution test".
If it's irrelevant, why do these tests exist?

I agree that too much can be made of numbers and specs. If it looks good, it looks good, but I couldn't help catching you in a logic trap. :-)

While I don't feel there's any bias on Zacuto's part, and I'm sure there IS bias on the part of GH1 users (we feel like our camera is getting an unfair bad rap), it just stings a little when you know that the GH1 can look better than the footage shown in the tests.

I KNOW footage from my camera can look better than that, and that's what's frustrating. Believe me, I AM shooting with my GH1 way more than I'm sifting through these posts and feeling self-righteous. On a more neutral note, I wish I could confirm the GH1's Film Mode settings the GH1 on those tests. It just looks so contrasty compared to the Canon images, and I know the Smooth setting with the contrast dialed down to -2 is a nice, lower contrast image with very filmic color. So that's my beef.

This will all be irrelevant soon enough as new models replace the current ones, so I'm not getting too worked up.
 
dvbrother said:
I agree, but the Zacuto test part 3 was called "the Resolution test".
If it's irrelevant, why do these tests exist?

I agree that too much can be made of numbers and specs. If it looks good, it looks good, but I couldn't help catching you in a logic trap. :-)

While I don't feel there's any bias on Zacuto's part, and I'm sure there IS bias on the part of GH1 users (we feel like our camera is getting an unfair bad rap), it just stings a little when you know that the GH1 can look better than the footage shown in the tests.

I KNOW footage from my camera can look better than that, and that's what's frustrating. Believe me, I AM shooting with my GH1 way more than I'm sifting through these posts and feeling self-righteous. On a more neutral note, I wish I could confirm the GH1's Film Mode settings the GH1 on those tests. It just looks so contrasty compared to the Canon images, and I know the Smooth setting with the contrast dialed down to -2 is a nice, lower contrast image with very filmic color. So that's my beef.

This will all be irrelevant soon enough as new models replace the current ones, so I'm not getting too worked up.
Click to expand...

The scenes were shot smooth with contrast -2.
 
Ben_B said:
The scenes were shot smooth with contrast -2.
Click to expand...
If that's true then I suppose I can't complain. Also, if they used the same lenses on all I can't complain either. I'll just have to keep shooting with my GH1 and being happy with its beautiful imagery, and ignore how it looks like the runt of the litter on the Zacuto tests.
 
Didn't they color correct each shot from each DSLR camera in post to try and match the film shots or did they not alter the image from each DSLR camera at all?

Randy
 
Can someone(in the know) please clarify the above question, I already asked a very similiar one with no response yet....
 
Colorwise they match pretty well. They did talk about the GH1 having a baked in look. That black level looks well...baked in.
 
I'm reminded of a conversation I had with my dad and his friend about the differences in iPhone cameras.

We were commenting that a lot of the pictures I took with my iPhone 2G looked better than those of my Dad's 3GS, even in low light.

I said: they're not actually better. You could get your photos to look like this with a little tweaking and they would look better. Mine are just a little more saturated and more contrasty out of the camera.

My dad's friend then chimed in: "Yeah, so they're what most normal people would consider...better."

Most of the time we shoot for as flat as possible to get latitude...but a lot of us like looking at a more saturated more contrasty image...we're going to put it there in post anyway...and then these cameras intercut just fine. The 5D might be technically a little better, it might keep a little more detail in the shadows, like my Dad's 3GS, but that doesn't mean the image is going to actually look better. I actually like the way the GH1 looks more in those tests you linked (particularly at the higher ISOs/aperture values, which helped with that lamp...which by the way I'd like to see with the same lens on each camera, even though the lenses were similar.)
 
Last edited:
I always thought that color correction included adjusting video levels like the black, white and gamma levels also. Guess not...

You think that the red (I assume it's supposed to be red and not pink) clothing that she is wearing is a close match between the GH1 and 5D?

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