Can you post the link again @squig? It got eaten/truncated.

MK3 raw vimeo group https://vimeo.com/groups/192344/videos Just got the 1066x card. 1928x1180 24p @ 90MB/s sustained :D. I recorded a 9Gb file before I got bored.

@TrackZillas maybe we are Vitaliy RAW for the GH2

@bannedindv wow! that genesis video looks great! Has a really great atmosphere, off course time of day helped out a little... (Watched it without sound by the way)

wow! that genesis video looks great! Has a really great atmosphere, off course time of day helped out a little...

Choosing the right time of day as well as how you photograph your subjects is arguably more important than achieving a perfect exposure. So, folks taking their hacked 5Ds out to shoot flowers with overcast skies or harsh front lighting, etc. are not making a compelling case for this thing being a big deal, if you were to look at the results of their effort.

With available light photography you still have to "light" your subject but in this situation you're moving your subject and camera (or just moving your camera relative to your subject) with respect to what the light is doing rather than the other way around. With a few exceptions, if you're shooting outside and there's the slightest chance you, the photographer, could cast a shadow over what you're shooting (or if your shadow points towards what you're shooting) then you're likely pointing the camera the wrong direction.

GH3 All intra 72Mbit corrected in FCPX vs. 14 bit RAW on EOS5DMKIII corrected in AE6, converted to ProRes 422HQ, imported into FCPX and exported to Youtube with Highest Quality H.264 possible (heh).

25 mm Summilux vs. F 1/1.8 50 mm Canon.

I tried my best to recover as much of the DR in post on in each footage.

@jakepowell no offense taken. What was better about those other images you have seen ? Better dynamic range, better story, better subject matter, better overall quality, focus, lighting ? The video was (primarily) a demonstration of a dynamic range comparison between one and the other. It was not an attempt to win an Oscar. It's a footage of a field and some plants after all. Hardly that exciting. I was curious about what the RAW can do - so I picked up a EOS 5d Mark III and am trying to compare. GH3 is my workhorse and I depend on it a lot. I used a GH2 before ... a lot. Needless to say I am frustrated by its limitations. You can only do so much in post. I needed to see for myself what can be done with RAW on Mark III. The footage from each respective camera was shot side by side from the same tripod - seconds apart. As hard as I tried - I could not get the clouds in the sky to look the same - without destroying the rest or not at all. I am sure that could be done with a graduated ND filter for example. I can set the focus on the MKIII, set the aperture and shoot. Everything else can be corrected in post. If anyone has suggestions for what they would want to see - please let me know. We are all here to contribute to the community.

@uninexus also no ofense and thanks fot the test, but did you grade the footage from Gh3??

If you did that's not a pretty job the highlights are so low that a had to line on the floor to see the comparison :-)

something went wrong there, Gh3 is much more capable of giving a decent fight, ok its not raw, ok is not 14bit, but that was unfair...

@SuperSet For example the wild rose footage works out like that: RAW file: 464.3 MB, Folder with .DNG images 467 MB, Prores422 HQ file of the same - 133 MBs, GH3 shot of wild rose: 37.1 MB, Entire ~ 1Min movie of mixed footage in Prores422 HQ: 1.45 GB, H.264 version for Youtube upload: 574.4 MB Hope that helps. So if you can't store the original RAW project files - you can store the Prores footage at 3.5x less space. Or you can store H.264 footage at 9 MB/s ? I hope I have that last calculation roughly correct...

@uninexus i would use the 50mbps mov mode first, and sharpen a little to taste , then the images just look flat, have u simply pulled the highlight levels down? there may be the problem i would let what blows blow a little (i can tolerate some in white fluffy cloud areas personally more than that flat looking image that just looks wrong) i just feel this test is not doing the gh3 any favors, i own the cam and it is a pretty damn capable camera , it isnt raw it isnt 14 bit but it is capable of some fantastic images (even of mundane subject matter like this) (and with much lower storage costs and much quicker workflows which is important to someone like me) do u reckon maybe you could make a similar version but with 50mbps and make the original files available for download and we can try out and repost our own comparisons? (if this is too much hassle just the original files from this one? ) sorry , i dont like knocking people and am by no means an expert but i know what i see... the 5diii footage looks very impressive however , (i just wish i had one atm lol)