Do we really need the GH4 and 4:2:2, 10 bit, 4K, Raw file? GH1 and GH2 still rock for me

Aria

@darkopera, the whole idea of what I just listed above is so that you don't have to archive the huge RAW files. Once the process I listed is done you end up with smaller 10Bit ProRes or DNxHD files that are still highly gradable with the full DR of the RAW files. The cool thing is that the process isn't that bad considering the excellent quality of the images you end up with.

Canon 50D used - $400 Komputerbay 128GB 1050x CF Card - $170 MLV Mystic - Free (to convert MLV to DNG) Cinelog - $40 (to apply LUT inside Resolve to DNG for Log space files) Resolve 10 LIte - Free (to convert the Log DNG to ProRes or DNxHD 10bit)

darkopera

Call me lazy, but coming from the motion graphics world (heavy 2d/3d), i'm kind of allergic to heavy workflows. I mean, to me shooting is the first step of the process... if it gets too complicate, heavy or expensive... i'm kind of loosing the point. Don't get me wrong, post production starts from the moment you transfer the footage in any workstation... but i don't want to add further steps to it. At list the first process of reviewing the shots must be straightforward. For example, i've been always amazed and scared from the workflow implied with the RED ONE raw material. So much quality, but so much pain in the ass to manage the raw. The final result are stunning, but what if you are in a run & gun situation and just wanna be able to shot properly and review/edit on the run? Not that it has be always that way... but all this "raw thing" it s kind of making everything slower. I'm not against it, i'm observing the whole process happening, and i hope it will get less frustrating with the time (either it will get easier, o i'll get more easygoing with it, maybe i just need the time to accept and digest it). By the way, speaking of quality, if i have to buy a used 60d, at this point i prefer the full frame glory of a 5D mkIII.

Rerbreg

I love gh2. But in some situations lacking more color depth, for color grading. I am very happy with light tripod and a small size of the camera can make are cool things.

tubefingers

@eurocameraman , nice work! how do you find it to match the AF101 & GH2 footage in a shoot?

Azo

@darkopera

I agree with most of what you say in regards to the raw workflow. However, there are different tools for different jobs depending on what you are doing or trying to achieve. I have access to 3=GH2'2s, Full Frame Nikon DSLR's, Canon XF305's, XF105's, and a Panasonic AF100 for shooting video.

So as an example if I plan to shoot something run and gun I would not use the GH2's for this scenario, to much of a pain in the ass to setup audio, nd filter etc etc when it is much easier to use the XF105 or XF305 which has everything built in. However, if I am in my studio and I want something with shallow depth of field I might use the AF100/GH2's as it is better suited for what I am trying to achieve (Shallow depth of field) and I have ample time to setup my gear.

IMO there is no PERFECT camera, every camera has its strengths and weaknesses. In the case of the GH4 there is no doubt in my mind that for the price this IS the camera to beat. Temper your expectations and learn to work the cameras strong points, otherwise you will never be happy with the end results.

The reality is that with cameras like the 5D Mark III, GH4, BMPC4K there really is nothing that you can't shoot and it is affordable!!!! To me you have to have an assortment of cameras to work in different situations, there is no one shoe fits all type of deal. Just like lenses different lenses depending on what you are trying to achieve.

If you cannot afford different cameras or different lenses then you really need to learn how to squeeze the most out of a particular camera. Currently, I am waiting for my Preordered GH4 to come in and I am pretty sure I will be happy with it. I am also realistic that it won't work for everything that I want to shoot but for the majority of stuff 70% that I intend to shoot the GH4 will do just fine.

AdamT

You don't need big hardware to work with 4K footage.

Azo

@AdamT

Yup that is awesome ;-) My 15" Retina MacBook Pro has no problem with the footage that I got off of the internet. I have a Mac Pro also but it is not necessary, you can just use a laptop ;-) I thought that I might have to purchase the Garbage can Mac Pro to edit 4k footage however it does not seem to be necessary. Now I can spend the money on more lenses ;-) Probably the Olympus 12-40 2.8 better focus mechanism I wish Panasonic employed this focus mechanism so I can get OIS.

racer5

You know what I don't like about the raw workflow? Luts.

Now everytime I ingest a batch of footage I have to, at some point, cycle through a folder of luts, apply each one, then compare them all in an obsessive compulsive quest to find the "right" one. And this is before any creative grading has even begun.

Aria

@racer5, I don't know what your workflow is but I don't find it hard to deal with RAW and the use of LUT's in Resolve Lite. The workflow is sped up treating my footage with the use of presets which take the footage from RAW > Log > ProRes and using a node you can apply a Rec 709 LUT and any further grades are easily applied using nodes.

I don't think it's a very difficult process in the least. It's harder to describe than it is to do in practice. I may not be understanding your point but from what I can gather it's not really hard unless you make it that way. For me it's the end results that matter most. RAW isn't really about speed, but it's also not as bad as many make it out to be.

darkopera

Ok, to summarize my point of view, i wasn't complaining because i'd like to have the most perfect camera model in the universe. As i said, i love my GH2... seriously, with the hack it became a special camera that can challenge, in a way, with some top quality results of high end cameras (i.e. crispness/detail) . So to me it's like to have a Ferrari, but with old and worn tyres. You could push it, but there could be problems. And as as Rerbreg says, with little improvements on DR it could be perfect. I know that low light shots are difficult to achieve because of the dimension of the sensor, and i know that rolling shutter exists because of the refresh speed nature of the CMOS... and i can accept partly these limitations (both using fast primes and stabilization gear).

That's why i posted my original comment and my little experimental film (made as a video for my song). I wanted to know your opinion on my point of view, and on the movie, in which i experienced all these problems.

As i already said, i'm ok with the sanity patch, as it's (to me) the most reliable patch i tried, it's really clean from noise and to my experience it allows me have more details on the shadows area to work in post. Obviously in a limited way.

@Azo, i would love to own more cameras, and i understand your point... different cameras for different purposes, but at the moment i only own a GH2, and i'm investing more in lenses and gear. And anyways i like the idea to limit myself with only one tool and find workarounds. Before these hybrid cameras, the price for a decent one was huge, and not everyone could afford different ones, so the only solution was to work around the limits and make it work. With my first post i was just trying to discuss that this new hybrid market offers to us different choices, but most of them are plagued by the same issues, in a way or another. So it's weird to have all of this choice, since some "classic" issues are always there. Maybe the new digital bolex will make a little difference (being ccd). Who knows.

racer5

@Aria

Well I don't find applying a LUT hard or difficult, but it burdens me with choices at the expense of other parts of the process. For example if I shoot a sunset in Log, I will have an endless tweak session to look forward to where I apply various LUTs blindly trying to find the one that best brings out the colors in the sky as I remember them.

If your workflow just means putting Rec709 on your footage before grading, why not just shoot ProRes with the LUT baked in? Drop it on the timeline and start cutting and grading without having to transcode.

jrd

seriously, with the hack it [GH2] became a special camera that can challenge, in a way, with some top quality results of high end cameras (i.e. crispness/detail)

If by "crispness and detail" you mean artificial sharpening, then you're right. If you mean actual resolution, you're absolutely wrong. Lower resolution isn't necessarily a demerit -- once you get to 700 or 800 lines, actual resolution is greatly over-rated, particularly for couch dramas. But it's just not true to say that the GH2 and the like offers the resolution of high end HD cameras.

As for the rest of this debate, there's no question that you can do far more in post with 12 bit RAW or 10 bit 4:2:2 material than with the 8 bit 4:2:0 coming out of a GH2 -- assuming the sensor has enough dynamic range to take advantage of it. If the power to manipulate the footage in post is of no interest or too much trouble, fine. But it's difficult to understand why some shooters are willing to invest large amounts of time in production and production value, but aren't prepared to spend 10 minutes on a shot in post.

darkopera

Well, to my eyes, artificial or not, it seems a lot of more gained detail, compared to other DSLR brands. I obviously was only try to say how much this can get "near" (not matching) some high end results. And i'm not the only one here or there saying this. These are just... "personal views" :-) Then i'm not that expert on the technical side of the camera, so i can't debate on what you say but i rather thank you for giving me such informations. Always glad to learn more. For my little short film i spent an enormous amount of time to correct issues with the footage, plus the post. and by the way i work in the post production, believe me that in the last years i spent my whole time in this industry, between motion graphics, compositing, tracking, color correction etc... So yes, you re right... i would like to have a hybrid camera that gives me a little more of what GH2 provide in terms of DR, possibly with less jello... and i'm good to go. I love to shoot, it's magic for me... and it takes me away from the studio making my life more real than living in front of a computer. This whole raw thing is making even the shooting&reviewing process a pain in the ass. It's not question of 10 minutes more or less. Let's see what will happen with the evolution of the GH4 and new firmwares.

act

I very like my three GH2 for any run and gun situation. Since I regular use external audio recorder last 4 years, syncing process with Pluraleyes is very easy for everyday work. GH2 is best cam to shoot at hard discotheque LED lighting, that we have at weddings. With good lenses I don't need Speedbuster to take natural look at any indoor or lowlight situation. But, at outdoor situation colors out from the camera not ideal and need correction. I found Olympus OMD EM5 close that case very good, so I use OMD for outdoor great colors, and excellent skin tone at daylight. I like add some color grade anyway and output is better than Canon DSLR, I very liked at daylight. I'd like to use GH2 forever, but articulated screen begins destroy it's plastic body and cable connecting. Unfortunately, GH2 has limited lifetime.

lmackreath

I came from a hacked gh2 to a blackmagic pocket and now have downgraded to a panasonic g6.

The gh2 workflow was easy but the image quality wasn't good enough for me (or so I thought). Then I spent around £2000 on a bmpcc and all The necessary accessories to make it work to get that image quality at the expense of a more complex workflow..

And now I have sold my blackmagic and am buying a g6. I don't get paid for my work... My viewers are friends and family.,, they have never said.."that was great but the compression artifacts really let the piece down" or " I liked it but it could have done with more dynamic range"...,they all love my work because of the story , the editing .,.,, the music.

I have no doubt that dynamic range, resolution, moire.. Rolling shutter etc is important to a lot of indie film makers but let's be honest., the majority of people on here and in most forums are enthusiasts., hobbyists., prosumers.. Whatever you like to call us., in short., people who enjoy it but don't make a living from it.

I have been dabbling in these black arts for twenty years now.,, and it has taken me till now to realise I need to stop stressing about the latest gear and just get out there and shoot. Because of technology these days I have access to these forums day in day out (I am writing this now in bed with my wife asleep next to me) when I should be reading a book., or sleeping .. Or something else apart from worrying about what everyone else is up to...

The choice of excellent quality equipment these days is beyond amazing., more than we as consumers could have ever imagined.., but it will continue to advance every year and we will forever be chasing it and wanting/needing the latest kit.

In my opinion right now the need for 4k video is overstated and ridiculous. We have been so spoilt in the past and now we have just doubled the resolution only to find that 6k at nab next year will now be the standard.

6k resolution videos of cats.., flowers... Holiday videos.....pointless..

I have come full circle now and realise I have been that guy... All the gear and no idea...

I love filming my life and I love my hobby but it should never break the bank and resolution , dr.. Bit rate etc should never takeaway from a good piece with a story , a point., or emotion..

I owned a bmpcc for 6 months .. and in that 6 months 99% of the videos I watched on vimeo shot on it were awful. Be it overexposed.. Incorrect white balance, no camera stabilisation.etc etc, ..worst of all no point or story. I admit Most if not all of my own videos are crap but yet they took me eons to grade and edit because of the workflow. In the right hands( that is a film crew and no one else) the bmpcc would be great.. But not for me.. Or any hobbyist IMHO.

Ok that's me done.,, story story story .. Remember that..we all have very capable video phones now to record things at a moments notice.. It's not all about the grading..the frame crate.. The resolution etc.. It's about a story or capturing a moment..

For anyone who does not do this for a living., stick to a dslr and don't go for raw and things like magic lantern .., your viewers won't notice the difference in quality butt you will do in time in the edit suite and cost in storage...

Good night!

eurocameraman

@Brian202020 When you write : "Personally I believe that for PROFESSIONAL USE unless it's a proxy, all footage should be at least 1080, 422, 10bit, and 150 Mbps or higher I-Frame If 1080 or 600 Mbps or higher I-Frame if 4K (UHD)." It is interesting as this post is just taking the opposite approach. Showing final results (professional creation, got paid to do that) without considering those data sheets numbers that many people needs to collect to feel safe to start shooting something significant. Some of my client favorite shots out of my camera were pure 420 AVCHD at 10Mbps, a low value due to shallow depth of field and the nature of the subject (soft skin and darkness wihout much details). See sample here (frame grab from video)

Who cares how big and fancy were the brushes and the exact chemical composition of the material used by famous painters to enjoy their creation? Lets consider feelings from final result, and lets relax on datas needed to deliver PROFESSIONAL works BEFORE doing anything. None of my client are asking me about those things anyway. They don't care. They hire me because they like my way of working and the final result I am able to achieve for them... None of those video are going to appear on movie theater screen, anyway, Highest resolution ever shown will be on Vimeo...

eurocameraman

@lmackreath Very interesting post and I think you came out to the right conclusion There is so much to learn and to improve in filmmaking (for whoever is your public) than buying new gears all the time; story telling technique, camera set up, lighting, camera movement and placement, directing, editing.. As soon as your video will be never shown on the big screen, there is nothing to worry about. My first feature film as a DP cameraman was a 40 minutes story shot in year 2000 on a Sony Digibeta (SD format, 720 x480 pixel! only). Leon Dai, the director spent all the budget to transfer that video to 35mm film after editing to be able to participate to Taiwan film festival. I shot on Hi8, DVcam, HDV and finally HD and I am old enough to consider that any tool available today is good enough to express myself and to staisfy my client. The GH1 was already a dream comes true camera (thanks to Vitaliy) and anything coming on the market since then is just adding to the greatness of that HD DSLR area. It is only too bad that camera makers are fighting more on numbers than on real useful feature, such as in camera ND filter and real great (wide and accurate) electornic viewfinder. This is a much more important features than being able to shoot Raw to me. At last, my video are always compressed to be shown on internet, Blue Ray Disk or TV screen... Part 1 of Summers (you can find part2 and 3 on my vimeo page). Best first film in Taiwan international film festival 2000.

RRRR

Perhaps semantics, but: let's make a difference for what people need and for what people want. And when it comes to cameras and gear - most of it is what people want.

To shoot a film we need a camera (and there are tonnes of options) but we may want some particular look or feel or whatever.. Sometimes the insecurity of someone makes some people think they need something expensive. Sometimes someone wants something particular for a very good reason but most of the time we confuse one over the other, or simply convince ourselves that we NEED when we actually want.

It's not clear cut in any means. For those who work professionally - it's not an easy business in general (but there are far more difficult ones) - choosing badly can hit back and make life more difficult. It's in general better to stick by with a system you know well for a little bit too long than to jump around between gears (that you never get the time to learn let alone master) all the time.

There is no doubt that there's a massive amount of fantastic tools that can deliver high end results for very little money. Therefore I also think that belief in gear is misplaced belief. One has to start with him- or herself and ask the question: What do I want to do?

I did exactly that this spring and so I am cleaning out all surplus equipment. I will keep 1 or 2 cameras at most at a time, and only the lenses I actually like. I stopped doing gigs (shoots) as I found the compromise of resources / quality / pay very difficult to deal with; it sucked all (or too much of) my energy, was difficult to combine with family life and did not give a lot of money back. Now, I only shoot for myself or something I find really interesting; when the circumstances are good enough for me to know I can do a good job; a job I'm happy with. Instead I make most of the money working with post production, which is a lot easier to combine with family life.

eurocameraman

@RRRR I think your totally right on your analysis and one thing I forgot to mention, which is important. In the commercial industry, we don't buy the equipment needed for big budget project, we rent it: camera, lenses, tripod, filters, light,,, everything is extremely expensive. This happens on TVC when client/agency/production agree on a specific type of camera which is a norm in the industry. All person involved in the job avoid to take risk and prefer to pay the price to get what everybody is using at that time. Few years ago, I shot a TVC on a 35mm ARRI camera with Angenieux lenses, in inner Mongolia and Beijing. It was a great working experience, but trully, there is nothing interesting in this commercial. https://vimeo.com/album/2717988/video/57199079 I also worked with a high speed camera for this project shot in Shanghai. This one was more interesting with mix of 35mm, High speed cam and 5D. https://vimeo.com/album/2717988/video/50456682

I did more fancy stuff on my own with my Lumix. Bigger the budget less freedom to create. Therefore, beside my usual professional life, I invested in consummer cameras to get the freedom to shoot whenever I had an idea for a personal project. This reasonnable investment also allowed me to create my filmmaking class as well.

RRRR

I think you are absolutely right, bot in your analysis and in how you go about things. To me personally I noticed I started to develop some cynicism which is not good for creativity (or the soul). Hence the decisions I described above.

With a bit of distance, commercials is a funny format. :)

eurocameraman

Here is an updated version with English subtitle of the short film I had shot with my first Lumix GH1 "Green Revolution" Please have a look. Since that film, I am still using my GH1 beside my GH2 and GH3, as I like its color rendition so much. Much better than GH2 and GH3 which are more videolike. GH4 just came in my toolbox, and I will give it a try for a short film this Summer. I moslty looking for the downscaling of 4K into full HD to allow me to create camera movement without using gears. This is the main upgrade from that camera for a 1 man crew. Beside, I like the improvement of the viewfinder compare to the GH3 ( a mess of a viewfinder!) even the color are still wrong and there is no setting available to solve this problem... Whatever camera I am using, I am going to focus more on the story and the way of shooting as I did in this video. GH1 still rock compare to nowadays standard. Have a look:

ezbzpop

congrats! you'll love it, i am already waiting for GH5 to shoot 60fps@4K

eurocameraman

@itimjim Better camera, better picture, everybody will agree on this, but the point of the discussion is to say who really needs that much technology, pixel peeping and fancy number to do stories with engaging, dramatic and beautiful shots that people will enjoy to watch on their computer screen, their Smart phone or on their TV set.

We are not speaking about Hollywood production released in Movie Theater here. For example, People who are doing big budget TV commerical HAVE TO rent the best equipment possible on the market, by respect for their client investment who is asking for the best result possible, even at the end, you will not see much of a difference on a TV screen. Please, take few minutes of your time to see what can be achieve with "weak" cameras, for personal work or paid job. (all those videos were shot with GH1 or GH2. If you can, watch the Cross Polo making of completely as at the end you can see the final TV commercial shot with RED. VW representative who was the client told me that their big boss was actually much happier with the making of than with the TVC as they found the car, the actor and the actress more appealing in my shots, whatever the technology behind the shots. We are speaking about emotion and story telling here, not laboratory tests.

Sangye

I sold my GH2 and bought a GH4, and there are times that I regret that decision. All other things being equal, I prefer the image of a GH2 running Moon T7, against a GH4 4K image downscaled to 1080p. The noise pattern is more filmic on the GH2, the highlight roll-off seems smoother, and the ISO performance honestly seems exactly the same if not slightly better on the GH2. Maybe that's just because macro-blocking in the shadows is much reduced on the GH2, but that's my assessment so far.

On the other hand, the GH4 gives better dynamic range, and a huge feature set that makes using it so much easier than the GH2. So at the end of the day, I'm keeping my GH4, and just hoping that Vitaliy or some other hacker will come along and open the way for higher bitrates with better matrices in 4K mode... because that's what is holding the GH4 back, and that's why the hacked GH2 still is the absolute best value in cameras today (I mean hell, I sold mine to some lucky sod for $250).

eurocameraman

@Sangye I can completely understand your feeling as I am having GH1, GH2, GH3 and GH4 series. I am working enough with those camera to be able to keep them all and in term of color rendition out of the box, I still prefer the GH1, but the GH2 improved sharpness and controls. I didn't yet shot something with the GH4 but as my film making class just started last Sunday, I am writing a new script I am going to shoot with my students and a multicamera set. Main camera will be the GH4, with GH3/GH2/GH1 beside if needed. Important to achieve a great look is the lens you put on the camera. As I don;t like the clinical look of the original offer in video, I shoot only corporate video with Lumix lenses. As soon as I am shooting a commercial or a short film , I am going for Nikon and Voigtlander manual lenses. During my previous course, I did a music video in a classroom and we had used 5 different cameras: GH2, GH3, Panasonic Af100, Nikon D800 and Leica M240. A great way to test different lenses and sensor size combination. You can see the result here:

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

Tags in Topic

Top Posters