Yeah, I noticed the goof on the "Nancy Schreiber" titling as well. Guess Zucuto was in too eager to get this out to us :)

As far as the empirical test, I'm a little disappointed with the GH2. Resolution, aliasing and moire wise, it's always better than the 7D (and most all EOS DSLRs), but it looks like it consistently gets smoked in the dynamic range department.

Then all the other progressively more expensive cameras were not surprisingly progressively better in the highlight and shadows department. I don't think anyone was surprised...

Oh well, I still hang my hat on the fact that when the time and effort is put into learning how to work within the limitations of the GH2 (or any camera) one can get really amazing imagery (especially on the GH2).

And of course, the point that has been beaten over everyone's head that it's the story that matters above all else, should also give us all some faith :)

-will

Part 2 has shown us how important professional lighting is. If you are into fiction, it's much more important than DR. For documentary, I'd hope for more adjustments in picture profiles in the GH3, the sensor has more DR than the current profiles can squeeze into 8 bit.

This I think goes to show the problem with our beloved GH2. A camera like the Alexa, F65 or Epic can work almost everywhere, doing more or less everything. The thing with the GH2 is that when handled in optimal conditions and by a good person, it looks amazing. It works best if you treat it sort of like older film stocks (before our HUGE dynamic range stocks from today) where you had to get a properly exposed negative and it would look great. It's the same thing here, as long as you work it well, bringing down highlights and shadows up to a good range, you will have an amazing picture. This test was good to show what the camera could handle, the last one showed what the people can make with that camera in the right hands. It's more challenging, but when done right, well then it's up there with the big boys.

@P4INKiller: Take note that it does show that the GH2 can recover a lot of lowlight, it isn't too great at handling highlights. And best results is still to light correctly.

I did this test here http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/1795/dynamic-range-test-between-gh2-and-7d/p1 between the gh2 and 7d with flat profiles. My conclusion would be that the hacked gh2 is on par with the 7d because the hack preserve a lot of the details in the shadows that can be recovered. In the last test they said that they specifically did not raise the shadows so that the gh2 in the worst condition.

From what I read is that camera like the Alexa best ISO is 800 because they are in fact underexposing, so the middle gray changes so that you have more information/graduation in the highlight than in the shadows. I am in no case saying that the gh2 has the DR of the Alexa, but it could have fared a little better.

For us, guys who shoot no budget films, docs and weddings, it is cheaper to light properly then to get Alexa :-) For big project it is exactly in reverse, as they have too big teams and too much time related expenses.

I spent a lot of time cringing at the GH2's highlight response. I knew it was bad... just not THAT bad.

@ahbleza That article makes me feel 2 different things:

A). If like the guy who wrote it, I had never shot on a GH2, I would feel the same way. He makes several salient points. Having to account for the highlight response and the DR does eat time, and changes the process quite a bit from what many of my colleagues are used to with film and high end digital.

B). Like @Gabel said, shooting on the GH2 is much like shooting with old Ektachrome film which had 5.6 stops of DR. If you shoot accordingly, and take the poor highlight response into account, you can get fantastic results. http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/comment/78982#Comment_78982 It just requires, knowledge, forethought, planning, and a little extra time.

I'd rather have an Alexa, so I didn't have to be so meticulous, and could focus more on painting the scene, and less on making sure I control the DR.

But the main point he makes is that producers NEED to be aware that the GH2 is not magic. It has limitations that need to be taken into account. It is not a "shoot everything in available light and it'll look fantastic" cam.

Finally the F65, to me, looks video-y. I'm actually very impressed with the F3 and the C300 - but still not particularly pleased with their price point vs. the GH2.

I agree with Art Adams in his ProVideo Coalition article - the three-part Zacuto trilogy was like watching Inside the Actors' Studio do a mini-series on indie DP's, highlighted by screen clips of a motley collection of the cameras they work with. In order to put everything from an iPhone to an Alexa on roughly equal footing, a small army of lighting technicians and post-production artists were contracted to show off the potential of each camera.

In my view, the one section that showed some useful comparisons was the series of ungraded clips at the start of Part 3. This displayed a sample of the results you can expect from a combination of natural and artificial light sources expertly deployed to make the most of each camera's dynamic range. Examine these shots closely to see how the technical shortcomings of the inexpensive DSLR's (blown highlights and rough shadow details) force you to accommodate their limitations in ways that are unnecessary with high-end cinema cameras.

IMO the BMDCC package is hard to beat. You get a very nice camera and software package that seems to be giving the Indie film maker most of what it wants from a camera at a very good price. It's not as cheap as a GH2 of course, but you get a lot for your money.

If you're willing to live with and budget for the lighting you'll need then a GH2 is a great low end solution. Every day lighting solutions are getting cheaper and of better quality. The DR limitations seem to be something you can work around from what I can see. No it's not an every situation camera, but who would expect that at the GH2 price point. Everything under $3,000.00 has limitations.

Some very good points made by all here. I don't think many of us would have let that 'Window Empirical Test' see the light of day in a film release but it proves you have to work at your lighting and camera settings. And yes, the inherent problems of the GH2 can at least be vastly improved.

The next revolution in video/cinema low budget gear will be the HDR video, similar to Magic Lantern HDR, but with different iso in adjacent pictures instead off different iso in adjacent frames. two streams from the same sensor merged in camera into one HDR video file.

I've got about two hundred thoughts on this recent Zacuto "experience," spanning everything from love to nausea. Certainly we all recognize that Zacuto and Kessler put a great deal of effort into that project -- and they deserve genuine respect and credit -- and I expect they'll win another regional Emmy.

But, in the spirit of Steve Weiss's "Critics," -- I'll share one point. Leaving out the forty or so minutes of inspirational plateau -- all it was was a dynamic range test. That's it. A dynamic range test that concluded -- expensive cameras have more dynamic range than cheaper cameras.

So, leaving out the forty minutes of high line inspirational peak, during which half of the people talked about the importance of the story line -- leaving that out -- the conclusion of this "shootout" was -- expensive cameras have more dynamic range than cheaper cameras.

My advice to the visionaries building their dreams with their hacked GH2 -- buy lights.

I think one of the biggest things thats being overlooked with all this GH2 talk about the DR is the fact that there are situations where you simply can't control lighting much. You're shooting on a beach, shooting on a sunny day with no lighting control, filming an event with blown out par cans and an actor on stage. Everything isnt' about relighting, and everyone doesn't make films. I feel like all everybody talks about is making films on here, but in reality most people are using their cameras to make money doing corprorate stuff, music videos, events, etc, not narrative filmmaking. The GH2's DR is definitly a limitation in situations, not everything can be fixed just by lighting to a smaller ratio.