andy lee Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 I didn't see 'supermarket lighting' at all ...it just looked pleasing to my eye! me and all my work colleagues liked the GH2 in the blind test and picked it as one of our top 3 as it looked good. Its all so subjective! Any how I like the GH2 its a great little camera....... it punches way above its weight!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Germy1979 Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 It doesn't bother me. Nobody with any experience on a Gh2 would cater to its weaknesses in a real world shoot like the Empirical test. I think they just went for the cleanest image with a nice sheen on it, and that's fine. It has kind of an immediately gratifying characteristic... But by no means would i give it the "film look" stamp. Seriously, an old fast takumar for about a hundred bucks and the right grading could've taken this in a totally different direction. You can't stick a razor lens like the Fujinon in front of a Gh2 with a 150mb patch and expect it to not perform surgery. You almost have to throw some dirt on it to give it some soul... But that's cool because it's cheaper. I've seen plenty of footage that looked filmic. Granted, I can't film an indoor scene on a bright sunny day and get all manner of what's going on out the window as well as inside. But i've seen plenty of Films shot on actual FILM that blow out windows also. Each sensor has its own character. A lot of these cameras throw a "milky" characteristic on skin that drives me nuts... You too $70,000 Alexa... andy lee, kirk, nahua and 1 other 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axel Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 [quote name='Germy1979' timestamp='1345361969' post='16026'] Lmao. You guys should head over to provideo coalition.com and read the pissing contest between Steve Weiss and Art Adams in the comments at the bottom. Pretty passionate stuff.. [url="http://provideocoalition.com/index.php/aadams/story/cameras_why_zacutos_latest_camera_test_may_have_screwed_us_all/P1/"]http://provideocoali...ewed_us_all/P1/[/url] [/quote] These are the voices we are supposed to listen to. Punch and Judy, facepalm. The expression fell recently: We are to [color=#ff0000]learn our places[/color]. Which is the side table. When Big Daddy talks, the kids listen. The "industries" point of view? Zacuto made it harder for them to fight with their clients for better equipment. O me o my, where is the sound effect [i]audience laughter[/i]? My point of view? I have to be content with the back seat. [img]https://dl.dropbox.com/u/57198583/WilhelmBusch.jpg[/img] (by Wilhelm Busch, a german poet of the 19th century) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlev23 Posted August 20, 2012 Share Posted August 20, 2012 as a professional DP for about 17 years, i do understand and agree with you that the talent of a DP and the work arounds for the lower end consumer cameras really can make much more out of prosumer cameras such as a GH2 or 7D. I have shot many popular music videos and commercials mixing epics and alexas with 5Ds and no one can tell the difference in the footage, of course these are mostly on big productions with every thing lit very well. this brings me to say, environments not lit very well, or too dimly lit, or too brightly lit, all fall apart in quality on the prosumer cameras, especially the GH2 and the 7D. this is built on many many years of experience. not only have i seen this in comparison but i have first hand experience with when the GH2 was first hacked, i had a pl mount, put on the best lenses in the world, and man, in a nicely exposed environment i was shocked how sharp and clear it was. i decided to do a handheld scene with it that moved through different environments, some perfectly lit, but some, still at exposure, were more dramatically lit with more dark corners and shadows...to my surprise, and i was embarrassed, mainly because i sold production on this camera for b roll, that as soon as i entered any more dramatically lit environments the image completely fell apart, banding, grain, the works. i wound up doing the scene with the RED MX camera, epic wasnt out yet... needless to say i wound up selling the camera on ebay. this is not only what i found with this camera but its with all dslr or consumer products. i had an alexa, a 5dMK3 and a 7D on a job this year, and the alexa and 5D cut together beautifully, but the 7D's operator decided to get artsy and shoot from a less front lit area, needless to say, it had artifacts all over it...again this year with my 5DMK3, i have done about 12 jobs with it, 11 in hugely lit sets, green screen, etc, and the vfx and post companies were all extremely happy with the footage. one job however, well, it was a short film, the director wanted it darker and more dramatic then i had it lit, which looked beautiful in our monitor, so we made a few changes and basically just removed the fill, the monitor was still looking ok, but when we went back to the computer to look at the footage, it was grainy as hell, at 320 asa, all i did is put back in the fill light and the footage was grain free. my lesson is that when i am asked to shoot on a pro-sumer camera, i know the job is going to be a little tougher and you have to be a little more precise on every single shot, you cant just light the environment beautifully and go. jlev23 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Andrew Reid Posted August 20, 2012 Author Administrators Share Posted August 20, 2012 I agree that if you are using 1/100 and F5.6 in a dimly lit location, and under exposing at ISO 500 your GH2 footage is going to look terrible. Put an Alexa, or even an FS100 into that situation and it copes much better. The photosites on a sensor with 16MP are always going to be small and need a good signal to 'perk them up'. If you avoid under exposure, and use a fast aperture, then the GH2 can play with the big guys in low light just fine. Over well exposed surfaces even at ISO 1600 it can work wonders. Fill light and crush the blacks. Totally the right approach with the cheaper cameras. And often it looks GREAT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlev23 Posted August 20, 2012 Share Posted August 20, 2012 agreed, except for iso 1600 comment, for broadcast, ISO 400 is the absolute limit, tests being done by a major post house confirmed that more than once for me, and the 5D held up to 640. unfortunate since my professional cameras are natively 800. but mainly my point was and i think yours was the same, each camera takes it own lighting technique, so its tough and almost impossible to shoot them together and have good results and a good comparison. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nathanleebush Posted August 21, 2012 Share Posted August 21, 2012 Loved your analysis of the series. I included some (attributed) bits of your ideas in my post summing up this year's tests: http://blog.adoramarentals.com/2012/08/20/revealing-ride-thoughts-on-revenge-of-the-great-camera-shootout/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lafilm Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 Just difficult. It really comes down to the atmosphere, lighting and DP. And of course the subject and director. They all have a place...just not all are right for feature films in my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.