galenb

Here's the 1080p version: https://vimeo.com/49272792

Wait, were you thinking this guy actually knows something? No. He's just saying that in 9 months you might need to get a new camera and that this product will work with that one as well. He's just referring to the "Future proof" nature of their products. Not an actual camera product.

[quote name='bg2b' timestamp='1347639812' post='18002'] The E-M5 sensor would make sense in some ways, but not in others. Makes sense in that Panasonic and Olympus together could probably get a lower price due to the increased volume. Doesn't make sense in that Olympus only seems to be reading the sensor at 30fps in video mode; if it was really capable of 60fps, you'd think they'd have at least put in 720p @ 60fps. Also the E-M5 has a base ISO of 200, while the GH2 will supposedly start at 100. I suppose ISO 100 could be a digital overexpose-and-pull, which would be yet another bummer. [/quote] I thought it was the imaging chip that dictates the frame rate and not the actual sensor?

@Philip: Well, I think your review was fine and I enjoyed it very much. But looking at the original comment above and ignoring the comment about not being a DP (it's kind of an obvious mistake if you are just going on what you see on your website), I think he was actually paying you a compliment. A lot of us here on the forum are big fans of natural light (or at least natural "looking" lighting) and tend to shun the glitzy Hollywood style so to say someone makes great images without having to use a bunch of lights is actually a compliment around here. ;-)

I wouldn't take these images as any indication of the build quality of micro 4/3 lenses. What you see are just pancake lenses. You make some sacrifices in order to have a low profile. You would see the same thing inside a Canon pancake. The regular MFT lenses are usually of very high quality. Olympus are outstanding and the Panasonic ones are designed by Leica (although they are manufactured in Japan) so you know they are very good quality as well. Speaking of Leica, I think it's pretty good endorsement of MFT if they choose to be a part of it. I have not ditched my DSLR in favor of a MFT camera. But that's only because I don't have a DSLR. ;-) I've used Canon cameras in my work for many yeas now and when it came time to choose a camera for personally use, I chose MFT because of the quality compared to it's size and the ability to adapt to all my weird lenses that I have left over from my SLR days. As far as apparent quality, with the right lens, I don't think you would be able to pick out the images made on a MFT cameras vs a full size DSLR. That's not to say DSLRs don't have their advantages. It's just that MFT does as well. there are trade offs to be made in either camp it just depends on what matters to you personally. Having said all that, I do think you raise some interesting points.

[quote name='beneos' timestamp='1346800119' post='17335'] [url="http://gizmodo.com/5894623/sony-and-olympus-mirrorless-lens-teardowns-reveal-beautiful-compact-design?tag=microfourthirds"]Just found this article that shows how the MFT lenses are made[/url] - I look at this and wonder - can these possibly be as good as a typical SLR lens? And you know that they maximize profits selling these for $300 a pop. [img]http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/media/2012/03/Sonycore1-1024x328.jpg[/img] [/quote] Funny enough, the image you posted is actually a Sony E mount lens. It's actually meant for an APS-C size sensor camera.

[quote name='charlie_orozco' timestamp='1347047321' post='17562'] Like I mentioned above, according to Phillip Bloom rolling shutter is there, but I think saying it's "bad" goes a bit overboard. Still, there was no fast motion in the shots he showed, so one couldn't really use them to judge the issue. In any case, as much as I hate rolling shutter artifacts, it shouldn't be a big problem considering it's better than DSLRs and it costs less than a 5DMkIII. And with a lot of room for improvement in the firmware department! [/quote] Well, yes... not in the beach shoot no. But there was a lot of hand held stuff in Finland and that would have shown some distortion if it was really that bad. There's even a shot of a train leaving rather quickly. Even though you can see the effect, it's not as bad as a 5DII. It feels more in line with higher end CMOS video cameras. I usually judge rolling shutter to be bad if you can see it distorting in the edges while you are just holding it by hand. If I'm shooting 24p on my GH1, I simply cannot hold it by hand. I need some sort of brace or something. Shooting 60 frames per second is better though I discovered.

Buy the way, I think I may have found out what the issue is with rolling shutter on the GH1. I've read that the faster the frame rate, the less rolling shutter you have. Initially, I thought it was related to shutter speed but the tests I've run show no difference at higher speeds. So I've been looking into it and it seems there might be a high bit rate patch that uses the original 60i>24P wrapper. Or even just shooting in 60i and converting to 24P seems like it will yield better results. I'll let you guys know what happens. I was also thinking of just shooting in PAL @ 50 fps and converting to 25P. It seems like the difference between 24 and 25 is really negligible. Does anyone foresee any issue with that? I'm shooting in the US so I guess there might be issues with light flicker...

[quote name='andy lee' timestamp='1347029227' post='17540'] Philip says it has 'Bad Rolling Shutter issues !' we have yet to see how bad these are I would like to see this camera being moved around quickly! [/quote] Did you see any rolling shutter issues in any of the shots? Looks pretty awesome to me.

This is something I've been wondering about too. If you look on Amazon you'll see a dizzing array of variable ND filters out there and the price seems to vary widely. I've seen them for as low as $10 all the way up to $200 and there's nothing in the information that I could find to give any indication what separates them. It would be great if they at least listed "Glass" or "Plastic" or something. Anyway, have any of you guys used any of the lower cost ones in the $20-$40 range?

I just got an email today. I was looking at it and had to re-read the first line a few times. "What? Micro 4/3... really?" This is really great news! But, there just had to be a catch didn't there. Passive lens options on Micro 4/3 is a bit limiting. But what can you do? I think this is really all about adapting lens mounts and in that respect, it's a much better option. All those people who were asking for a PL mount will be happy about this. Oh, and C-mount lenses! ;-) It funny because it has always seemed to me that Blackmagic have been trying to emulate Apple's style. With the design of their website to the design of the products. Now it's almost like they are emulating the famous caveats in so many Apple product releases. Like when the iPhone came out it was amazing an dazzled us all but was missing things like 3G and MMS. Some people have even speculated that these deficiencies were planned as a way to be able to offer improvement latter down the road and get people to continue buying new ones. I don't know about that but I guess it makes sense. At any rate, it keeps things interesting. One thing I noticed that While looking at the image of the BMCC-MFT (oh the acronyms!) is that there is now what looks to be a removable flange around the lens mount that wasn't there before. That might indicate even more Blackmagic mounting options in the future.

I just got it. It's pretty great. I have to figure out though why there is so much rolling shutter in my footage but not in footage that I see on the net. The weird thing is that looking at the screen while in not in record mode, the problem is diminish quite a lot. But as soon as I hit record,it goes all jello vision on me. Also, I've hacked it, cracked it and packed it with high bit rate love from Vitaliy and friends but it's just not giving it up for me. I mean, other then the rolling shutter, the footage looks great... But, looking at it in two different bit rate analyzer programs, the best I ever get it 12-16 Mbps. And I've installed 100 Mbps Max latitude patches! At first I thought it wasn't taking the patches so I loaded up the Anamorphic patch and recored a little bit in MJpeg. Sure enough, there it was after I recorded it; 1920x720. So I know it's at least taking hack. I really don't know what's going on. If anyone knows whats going on please let me know. :-)

Yay! I love Slesicki's work!

Cool, thanks Zach. Yeah, I was just thinking that eventually I'll be getting a more expensive camera at some point (BMCC or something like that) and I'll just keep this as an extra "B" cam.

For get the shooters guide... Where the hell are the reviews?! ;-)

This is true. However, I'm not so sure I'll be able to get a GH2 for $350 after the show. ;-) I'm sure in time the GH2 will drop in price and the GH1 will come down even more but I have a feeling that wont happen right away. There's even a that this will just be an announcement and then we'll have to wait for 2 or 3 months till it's release. And, there's even a strong chance (from what I've been reading at least) that the GH3 will be more expensive and cause the GH2 to hold it's price for a while. What would be really disappointing is if they also came out with an in expensive replacement for the GF2 that had more of the higher end video features of the GH2. Now that would suck... or I mean, would be cool but would suck for me. ;-) I did some more research and was able to find out something that's kind of disappointing about the GH1 but not a deal breaker: HDMI out only works for playback. So, no external monitoring for me. I think I'm just going to do it. Right now I just need to get a camera that shoots better quality movies then my video camera so I can start shooting stuff for myself. I haven't been able to find a GH1 for less then $400 on the internet so I think this a pretty good deal. Does anyone else have anything to add?

I see. So are your other Anamorphic videos shot the same way?

Hi everyone, I have a chance to pick up a Panasonic GH1 body for $350 (US). I already have lenses from my other cameras so I'll just use an adaptor. I'm wondering what the major differences are between the GH1 and GH2? Is it still a viable choice? From what I've gathered, the color is a little less saturated and it's not as good in low light. Any other features that I might miss from the GH2? Also, I noticed that there are not as many patches available for it. Is that just because the GH2 cut off the GH1 patch development or is it because the GH1 isn't as hackable? Thanks for you help guys, I really appreciate it!

I just watched these GH2 videos last night that blew me away. they were shot by forum member [url="http://www.eoshd.com/comments/user/13810-francisco-rios/"]Francisco Ríos[/url]. This video has some really nice shallow depth of field: https://vimeo.com/42675666 It's kind of long but the quality and cinematic feel are great. however, This one has an amazingly cinematic feel too and shows off how good GH2 anamorphic can look: https://vimeo.com/37669389 As far as low light goes, I can't seem to find this one specific video that I saw on Vimeo that shows low light comparisons between three cameras and the GH2 did really well. Maybe someone else can elaborate more on this but, from what I've seen the GH2 has a lot more latitude in the darks so theoretically if you shoot low light, could you just shoot with a low ISO and put it back up in post? Not trying to push the GH2 but just saying, from what I've seen, it looks like the best option really.

I used to be totally against using Canon DSLR's for VFX shots. The problem I've run into is that the rolling shutter is pretty bad. But, as long as you don't intend to do any 3D tracking (planer tracking isn't as much of an issue) you should be fine. 3D tracking is for when you want to insert a fully rendered CG element like a monster or car or something into a moving, live action shot and you want it to track with perspective changes. If the shot has a lot of distorted angles due to rolling shutter, the tracking will fail or produce bogus results. So, just keep that in mind when you are shooting. If you do intend to do that, then just avoid any hand held shots to keep the movement down to a minimum. An added bonus of the T3i is Magic Lantern. I've never used it myself but I have a thing for focus assist with peaking and it looks pretty cool. About lenses: I don't think this should be as big of a concern to green screen as it would be to just the style of your film. I mean, do you want to shoot wide or medium or closeup or... All of the above? those are the things that will dictate what lens to use. There are the obvious concerns with sharpness and it's effect on green screen but really, if you are that concerned, only a very expensive cinema lens will do. Since you are on a $1000 budget, I'd say to just find some cheap primes. They are usually shaper then a zoom lens.

By the way, I had a look at your other videos. Man... That one of the old train! Amazing! gorgeous! [media]https://vimeo.com/37669389[/media] Love this one!

Well I don't have a better workflow for you unfortunately. But I am wondering why you choose to shoot in JPG Move at 30p and converting instead of just shooting 24p in AVCHD? The clip looks really nice by the way. :-) I'm not sure if I've ever seen black and what footage shot in anamorphic? I usually think of all those cool 60's and 70's moves instead but this is really quite cool instead. It's kind of a new thing for me. ;-)

The focus peaking on those SmallHD monitors is so worth it though. The DP4 looks awesome and it can double as a EVF too. I want one so bad.

Well, I do VFX/CG Animation for a living. I have no idea why he wouldn't be able to get a good key off a GH2 versus a 7D. That doesn't make any sense. Maybe someone with a GH2 can do some tests? Anyway baring that, I'll say that yes, for your budget the GH2 is probably the right camera. Not that I've ever had to key GH2 footage. I've mostly dealt with RED and Canon 5D/7D footage. The biggest issue for me when keying DSLR footage (and the biggest difference between that and the RED) is the compression in the details and across color gradations. Since the hacked GH2 can give you much finer details due to less compression, it's going to be the better camera for green screen work in your budget. That said, I've never had a shot that couldn't be dealt with in some way. You can always use multiple keys for different areas of the shot, garbage masks and if worse comes to worse, you always just hand roto. While working on commercials, a lot of times they don't have a technical director on set and they shoot stuff without knowing exactly what to do. Or sometimes, you just don't know because you've never done anything like that. In those cases, hind sight is always 20/20 but you end up learning a lot in the process. If you wanted to avoid all the pit falls and be as safe and practical as you possibly could, you'd just shoot on a RED or similar high end camera and be done with it. But, being as it is that you are on a budget, I think you'll be just fine with a hacked GH2. As far as Canon cameras go, I personally wouldn't choose a 7D. Not even for anything else to be quite frank. I know a ton of people who have 7D's and they always look soft and smeared. Keying hair is a real problem on the 7D because of this. If you are stuck on Canon cameras, I think you are better off saving your money and getting something like a t3i or similar and just selling it later or. You can spend the money you saved on the 7D and get a nice lens. ;-) In my eyes the step up in quality from a t3i to 7D is a lot less noticeable then going up to a 5DII since the t2/3/4i all have essentially the same APS-C sensor as a 7D. But again, as long as you are not expecting ILM quality green screen keying, you should be just fine. Later when you have the money to make a larger budget film, you can just rent a RED or something similar.

According to that features page, it has 12 stops of dynamic range: [quote]Users will appreciate the new camera's 12 stops of dynamic range at all ISO speed settings from 320 to 20,000.[/quote]