Zacuto 'Revenge of Great Camera Shootout,' featuring GH2

thepalalias

If you have a fan, or something else with consistent repeatable motion, it is easy to setup tests on a tripod to shoot the same thing with different shutter speed. The GH2 does not "magically" do better at 1/40 or 1/50 but they do look different from each other (and if they did not, it would indicate that the shutter control was broken). Try both and see what you like. As for myself, at 24H I tend to use 1/50 or 1/60.

As far as RED, the main thing I noticed in the footage so far in regards to motion (and I reserve the right to change my mind later) was how much of an improvement the RED was for rolling shutter. Using a long lens handheld, I consistently felt like I was more limited by my ability to hold the lens, than by the camera. On the Gh2, the rolling shutter using the same lens was much more noticeable.

The rolling shutter on the GH2 is not great, but we already knew that. So if your scene has a high amount of motion, that can be an issue (depedning on the type of motion). Gunnar Thalin measured the rolling shitter values for various cameras, including the GH2, for use with his DeShaker filter, so you can take a look at his table for a reference on that.

P.S. My client loved the footage I shot with both the RED and GH2. They commented very positively on the motion in the RED shots, especially the low resolution 120p played back at 24p as slow-mo.

EDIT: The info I mentioned for DeShaker rolling shutter is up at http://www.GuthSpot.se/video/

svart

@kholi, @plasmasmp, I noticed this strange cadence "look" the other day in bright sunlight. I thought it was my monitor so I tried it on a different monitor and then on a computer. All the same strange "look". I tried long and short GOP and got the same. I then processed through neoscene as "all-I frames" and the strobing is gone. Can you confirm this on your ends?

Philldaagony

Is anyone planning on attending either the 5:30 or 7:30 showings in Chicago tomorrow night? I recevived a call from Zacuto to confirm my attendance, and I have four tickets reserved, but I need to give them names of those accompanying me. Well, my local guests have backed out, and I was wondering if anyone wanted to go. I can put your name on the list, but I need to know ASAP!

thepalalias

@svart That sounds more like a playback issue than a shooting one. Using Cineform all i-frame, I have not had any cadence changes during the conversion.

pinger007

@philldaagony

I'd love to go! I'm off work at 6:30 and can meet you there. Hit me up with details...

L1N3ARX

I love the fact people are starting to finally acknowledge motion cadence issues and differences between the GH2 and other cameras. Whereas everything usually seems to center around DR, (color) resolution etc, no one ever talked about motion rendering. For me, it's absolutely key.

It's undeniable that there's something inherently "film-like" about 24p captured by the GH2 which you can't find in other cameras less than 10k. While Panasonic is usually very good in this one area, the AF100 seems to lack some of these specific qualities that draw me to the GH2. Wish I could understand better the differences between how the motion is rendered in a large sensor video camera vs a DSLR (especially between 2 products from the same company no less, gh2/af100 etc).

What is the secret formula? Is it primarily a codec issue? A shutter issue? I'm totally excited to see the results from the shootout based on what I've heard so far.

Aria

I don't know what everyone is talking about in terms of the Motion Cadence difference between cameras. I would love to see some kind of test demonstration of the relative differences between a GH2 and something like a Sony if someone has something already done that would be nice to see. Anyone done something like this?

thepalalias

It would be nice if someone could post such a cadence comparison. So far no one that has talked to about it has been able to show me what they mean - they just tell me their conclusions.

To anyone that feels very familiar with the cadence differences: Back in the original Zacuto comparison (GH1, etc.) there is a section where they compare going from ultra lowlight to turning on a lightbulb in the lattitude test. Is there enough motion in that to demonstrate what people are talking about? Or is a very large amount of motion required? Does the GH1 have a similar cadence unhacked (or hacked) as the Gh2?

See, I honestly do not worry about it normally. I am not saying that it is or is not there, but with every shoot having to compromise in some area (and with the cameras varying so widely in dozens of other ways that are at the forefront of the decisionmaking process) the cadence just does not come up for me.

I prefer I-frame footage when possible for 24P, but I make do with others when I need to (and quite often when I am shooting 50P or 60P).

Django

@philldaagony

I am interested in two tickets to the Chicago screening. Let me know.

svart

@thepalalias, yes I thought it was a playback issue, but I saw it in VLC, WMP and Splash until I converted. If the files weren't multiple gigs, I'd post it. I'd never really seen it before and I can't say I've seen it since, only in that single file in that condition. But yeah, it's hard to show true "proof" because even the same files on different computers can play differently. There are too many variables. You'll just have to see it on your own setup.

Try 18mm@F11, ISO160, 24p/50 with Sedna Q20 and pan fairly slowly across sky and trees. It was the transition between sky and detailed leaves that showed it, as @Kholi and @Plasmasmp said.

Aksel

Hi there I just got out of the screening of 'Revenge of Great Camera Shootout,' in Chicago it was amazing. Almost everyone there chose GH2 as their best camera without knowing it, and the best part was after they discover that it was GH2 they couldn't believe it. some even started laughing. GH2 rocks in the right hands

pinger007

Just attended the shootout in chicago... All I can say is wow! The gh2 really blew people away. In the blind test, the gh2 was voted 2nd only to the f65!!!! The epic came in at 4th! People couldn't believe it. I couldn't even believe how well it performed and I'm a proud owner of three gh2s. The guy in front of me was an epic/alexa owner, but after the test he commented that the quality of the gh2 is impossible to ignore.

Aksel

Hi @pinger007, were you in the 5:30 or 7:30?

pinger007

@aksel

Were you at the 7:30 screening? Where were you? I was the guy commenting in the back...

pinger007

:-)

Aksel

I was in the 5:30 one ;-)

pinger007

Cool.

Wasn't it crazy how well the gh2 stood up to the big boys!? Some folks at my screening were in denial - how can a little $600 camera surpass a camera costing 100x more!? I am proud to be a gh2 owner.

I was with another personal view member, phillaagony, at the shootout. Great guy! Just met him tonight. All of us chicago guys should get together sometime and talk shop. Shoot me a message and we'll exchange info...

Vitaliy_Kiselev

My position for this shootout is the same as previous year.
Best thing is not to bash it or prise any cameras.
Best thing is to invest your time in skills, people and stories. As for cameras and shootouts, you'll check them anyway, aren't you? Just do not spend much time discussing them, your time is too valuable to waste it. :-)

TrackZillas

@Vitaliy_Kiselev Well said V.K work on your skill only that counts, at the end of the day a piece of gear is a piece of gear. Nothing can take away your cinematography skills, one more area I think people ignore is lighting that is key!!! can't stress that enough. I'm really proud & happy on how the GH2 performed, now it's time to practice. By the way I will attending the BOSTON Screening anybody going?

Aksel

Believe it or not that was the main idea behind 'Revenge of Great Camera Shootout,' to make people care more about the talent and less about the gear by proving that any tool is viable if you nourish your talent, because anyone can buy a camera but few have the talent to make something beautiful out of it.

thepalalias

@svart Still sounds like it could be a playback issue. Did you try playing the section back in your NLE using "Build Dynamic RAM Preview" or something similar? If you still get the issue with that, then it might be in the file.

Other than that, remember that we are dealing with files that have very high bitrates (considering the codec used) and that most media players can choke on an awful lot of systems trying to play them back.

@aksel @pinger007 Sounds like the lighting team working with the GH2 did a very good job of playing to the cameras strengths. They should be applauded for their skill. If the dynamic range is handled properly, and the color doesn't suffer excessively from the banding issues, etc. then the GH2 can deliver performance far outside the price class. One of the nice things about shooting with a camera like the Scarlet or Epic (and I would guess with the F65 and maybe some others) is that you have a wider choice of lighting options that will work well.

I got some shots with the Scarlet last week that the GH2 could not get. So when I came back with the GH2 for additional shots later that week, did I try to push the GH2 to do what it could not? No, I played to it's strengths instead: shot similar things really underexposed to get silhouttes or really overexposed to get an ethereal and difficult to place look, things like that. And it looked fantastic. If I had tried to shoot the same shots for the music video with the GH2, they would have gone unused because the Scarlet did it better. So it all depends on what you have access to and what you are shooting.

I've said it before: my perspective is coming from a lot of landscape photography and timelapse, working in situations where you cannot relight the scene. In those situations, the GH2 keeps up resolution for Full HD delivery very well, but the 12 to 14 stop dynamic range of some of the other cameras really improves things in a big way.

Just to be clear: I love shooting with the GH2 and I am happy to do just about any project with it. There are just some things that work a lot better with the more expensive cameras when the budget can support them. If it doesn't, I modify the shots slightly to make the most of them with a GH2.

Aksel

@thepalalias I couldn't agree more :-)

Philldaagony

@pinger007 and his observations about the shoot out tonight in Chicago are right on. Also, @Vitaliy_Kiselev your stance on the shootouts is more or less the conclusion reached during the discussion portion of the shootout. Everyone agreed that all the cameras, when used by talented individuals, could produce amazing images. Obviously some have workflow advantages etc, but the emphasis is now on the skill of the creators in terms of cinematography and operation and story. Because so many people can make beautiful images, the camera is no longer a limiting factor. Even the half/snobbish guy in front of Ping and I who couldn't stop talking about how he owns an Epic, made the point that people can no longer make the excuse that they don't have the right equipment to create worthy projects because they don't have access to high-end gear (he also made some weird point about DSLR footage having a longer workflow than his red, and being able to get more shots in a day with a Red and his crew? Yea, kinda ignored that)

Overall though, lots of very knowledgeable people, and very little discussion concerning pixel peeping etc. Although I do feel bad for one of the more vocal DPs who uses a 7D, which the test wasn't kind to. The graded iPhone 4 footage looked better than the 7D :-/

thepalalias

@Phildaagony Yes, the baseline image quality has been raised.Under a wide variety of conditions, the looks achievable with equipment measuring in the four digits greatly exceeds what was available to 16mm or 8mm indie film makers from 10-15 years ago, let alone the mini-DV or Digital8 options from the same timeframe (or heaven forbid Hi8...)

For image quality that the consumer notices right off the bat, it is no longer a case of the difference between "amateur recording" and "professional recording", at least not for anything but the lowest price bracket. Now it is the difference between "amateur filmmaking" and "expert filmmaking" and the cameras are not differentiated by their basleine image quality, but moreso by their image quality performance limits.

And that is a good thing for the audience. Even as a kid, I hated poor image quality. :)

jrd

Even the half/snobbish guy in front of Ping ... made the point that people can no longer make the excuse that they don't have the right equipment to create worthy projects because they don't have access to high-end gear.

What that actually means is, now would-be filmmakers will discover the real excuses (and good ones!) for why they can't create "worthy projects": no resources for great writing, no resources for great acting, no resources for professional lighting, no resources for credible locations, and on it goes....

Camera performance has always been the least crucial item on that list. General audiences simply don't notice the differences, or care much when they do notice. And in the realm of ultra-low budget filmmaking, audiences aren't necessarily looking for or demanding great production values anyway.

Don't get me wrong: it's great that a camera as cheap and flexible (and hackable!) as the GH2 can produce images which hold up well for the big screen. But in the low-budget realm, camera and shooting format -- 35mm, 16mm, DV, HD, Hi8 -- has almost no correlation to whether a project succeeds or not. It must also be said that in the low-budget realm, the overall quality of the material often has little to do with success either, but that's another matter....

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

Tags in Topic

Top Posters