KarimNassar

I don't understand how you can ask such a question Andrew because I downloaded the 1080p and this video is a big letdown and nothing else. The cinematography is bad. There is no consistency between the shots color wise or look wise they feel put together and don't flow well. Overall the colors are bad as well. Shadows are crushed in every single shot, most of the footage is overly contrasted and has poor dynamic range. Lighting is bad as well. But all of this is purely the responsibility of the dp and post-production so it means nothing concerning the gh3 quality which is all I care about. But even so in that aspect...everything is soft. :( And where is the high dynamic range they talked about? burned highlights, crushed shadows....there is a lot of color noise in the night shots as well. Overall it looks like my mark II footage, it has the same overly contrasted muddy feel. waiting on more footage...

[quote name='Xiong' timestamp='1347964598' post='18433'] I agree, that test shot, I did not like. Though it might be based on the shooters taste. Waiting for more samples :D [/quote] shooters taste aside, he got the gh3 before anyone else and all he does with it is shoot random stuff in the streets? Really? What about challenging the camera to see what it is capable off? Go through high dynamic range setups, test the rolling shutter, duplicate the shots with the gh2 to compare, make a video with the different iso ranges to see which ones are usable, test the different video formats, movie modes, test to see how well the footage holds up in post-production with the new codec etc...etc... I know most likely he will come up with more vids, but I don't think I am being too demanding of gh3 testers to come up with something more than a cat on a chair shot with no preparation what so ever

[quote name='KahL' timestamp='1347939300' post='18413'] After seeing the prototype first shots ungraded [url="https://vimeo.com/49558910"]https://vimeo.com/49558910[/url], NOW I am convinced. Highlights SEEM on a Canon level finally so far, though I want to see some night time shots w/ street lamps. But, so far looks great. And skin tones seem on point too. Definitely impressed so far. Take my money! [/quote] that's funny because when I saw this footage my reaction was were the hell is the high dynmic range? Highlights and shadows are burned out and the footage is too contrasted, dslr like. Looks no better than the gh2 to me but I know I must not make a judgement on a single video, so I am not, and waiting for more footage.

Damn talk about bad news hope no workers were harmed by the protesters

they really put this camera together with the creatives in mind very impressive especially at the price! looking forward to know more

[quote name='Axel' timestamp='1347692574' post='18091'] With my half knowledge I understand the term macro blocking as the 'big square pixel clouds' I see in big, darker areas. Correct me. It is probably not noise, but simplifying gradients, and therefore has the same origins as banding. Does it disappear at higher bitrates? [/quote] My bad I most likely made an English mistake and it might be called an artifact? I don't know if it disappears at higher bitrates, but I can tell you that with the flow motion 2.02 hack which is hbr it is very much present.

Why is everyone arguing about color depth? While a very interesting subject and I enjoyed the discussion, it is not the most visible downside of the gh2 image quality. By converting the video in 10bits in post you can push the image quite far already. And although 10bit is much welcome straight out of camera for grading flexibility, isn't the flashing macro blocking noise the most visible downside of the current gh2 image quality? I think it is the most visible let down that must be fixed before even considering more color depth... I really hope the new codec gets rid of this. You want better image quality for your movies on the gh3? Taking the gh2 as a starting point, what I think we need, ranking by most visually noticeable is: 1. No more flashing chunky macro blocking noise. Grain like noise instead. 2. Wider dynamic range especially in the highlights 3. More color depth for grading flexibility and better gradients At least that's the way I see it.

[quote name='nahua' timestamp='1347623289' post='17971'] You understand that when the GH2 first came out you couldn't get it anywhere for over 3 months. Announced in September 2010, it wasn't until March 2011 that there were significant quantities in the US. Only people in Japan and asia were able to get them in 2010. So you can harp on Black Magic all you want, but Panasonic had significant problems supplying anything M43. This includes their awesome pancake lenses, Leica 25mm, batteries... the list goes on. I hope that Panasonic gets their ass in gear and produces mass quantities of the GH3, otherwise it could be well into 2013 until we even see any in the US. [/quote] I did not know about the gh2 delays as I bought mine recently. Sadly it seems to be the trend regardless of the company but that does not mean it is any less unacceptable. Preorder our product that we say we ship in January, but wait actually it will be shipped in march, and by the way when we say we will ship it in march we mean we will ship 50 units for the whole world... Can't believe this happens so much...that's just bullshit

ha! very interesting thanks for sharing! I'll shoot at 320iso from now on...

it does look nice. I still need to know how wide that "wide dynamic range sensor" really is. And most importantly if the new all-i 72mbps gets rid of the flashing macro blocking of the gh2 that I just don't want to see anymore. The thing is, the bmcc now getting a m4/3 mount, and not being much more expensive than the gh3 with a lot more to offer, the gh3 is not as appealing as before. But I cannot stand companies like bmcc that don't hold up to their promises and sell you something they don't deliver. I'll wait to find out more about the gh3 and I will follow black magic and how bad the delivery delays really are and I will make up my mind.

those sure look nice!!

thanks! I wish I did not mess up the exposure on the last one, but those vids are exercises so it filled it's purpose and taught me a lesson. I did re up the vid though,I crushed the blacks too much on my first edit. You know you messed up your exposure when you have to darken the shadows in post and not bring them up...

rented an LA7200 this weekend, looking forward to hearing your thoughts http://vimeo.com/49113180

very good news

thanks for the info! very interesting read I do own andrews book and it's great but unless I missed it he does not talk about the ones currently used in the industry so I was wondering

Lomo squarefront? I don't know much about anamorphics but don't they have access to newer and better ones? I know the Lomos are great but what does hollywood shoot anamorphic with these days?

I know way too many flares and I don't like the music but some very nice shots and grade: [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEo6AdSTVfI"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEo6AdSTVfI[/url] Any idea what they shot this on? apparently rockhard did it but no info on gear on the website

2 weeks to go...

very interesting read! I agree about what you said about the more extreme aspect ratios. I think they can be very beautiful and work quite well, you can have beautiful shots of scenery etc. But the two mains problems are you end up looking at a screen that is mostly black, and more importantly it hurts storytelling which is the most important part. Now one solution would be for me to squeeze the footage correctly 2x and cut the borders of the frame on the sides. This does not work for me simply because I spend time composing the shot on the set with the full frame visible, and the cut ruins the composition. I found a rental company that rents the la 7200 for cheap so I will be experimenting with that soon :)

interesting setup thanks for sharing would matte box that hold filters be an option too? or would the filter be too far away from the lens

You are right about the aspect ratio, couple people commented on vimeo as well. I tried an in between aspect in my latest vid because I don't like the correct 2x squeeze: I think it works well but let me know what you think! http://vimeo.com/48706272

thanks glad to hear that! the thing I want the most out of the new codec and bit rate is better noise. Grain like noise and not blocky artifacts. That's the only thing I dislike about my gh2 footage Is that to be expected from an improve codec and bitrate?

Andrew it should have the same mount as the GH2 for lenses? I want to get the nokton 17.5 but I'm waiting for photokina to be sure

nice setup! how wide of an angle can you go up to on your regular lens? Any footage from this setup?

Okay so here is a first test with anamorphic <3 complete description on vimeo, feel free to follow me there and I will follow back. Would be nice to network. looking forward to hearing your thoughts! [media]http://vimeo.com/48236294[/media]