Test footage from the pre-release Panasonic GH3 at Photokina

[Axel]

On the Pana site they advertise 'accurate white balance and faithful color reproduction through Life TTL direct metering', but not as a *NEW* feature. What I found out using iA-mode with the GH2 is that AWB changes color temperature dynamically during recording, so that you pan from the yellow wall to the window with the overcast sky in the background and you will see an ugly dissolve from a cold light to a warm light. I also foolishly used iA once in a night club with a lot of colored lights. Automatic modes are simply dumb.

[color=#222222][font=Helvetica Neue', Arial, Verdana, sans-serif][size=4][background=rgb(255, 255, 255)][quote name='zephyrnoid' timestamp='1348429365' post='18961']What I have no dubbed "Nato Orange Cast" is not an overall cast so if you WB on a pure white card ( i never do BTW) it will not solve this particular problem.[/quote]

A pure white card mostly clips at least one color (the warning 'image too bright' isn't always reliable), so you should better use a neutral grey card. Or, best, use a lens cap with a convex diffusor (not the cheap chinese ones). But the most important thing is to [u]fix[/u] the WB on a setting that fits generally. So either you repeat the measuring [u]for every shot[/u] or you simply choose the tungsten symbol or whatever. Just stay away from AWB![/background][/size][/font][/color]

[color=#222222][font=Helvetica Neue', Arial, Verdana, sans-serif][size=4][background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]The skin tones of Pocahontas looked as good if not better than those with an EOS, and that's a progress. Unpleasing skin tones were one of the problems of GH2.[/background][/size][/font][/color]

[riccardocovino]

[quote name='hmcindie' timestamp='1348418074' post='18952']
Sony has much less than Canon aye?

[url="http://fil.io/FL82vTNAM/Sony%20A99%20raw%20photos%20and%20footage"]http://fil.io/FL82vT...tos and footage[/url]

This 00023.mts was shot with the A99. Does it look like it has less? Same thing happens with the Nex-5n when in the 50p mode.

Horrible moire/aliasing.
[/quote]

Maybe it wasn't clear, but I stated under 2K $ Sony has less moirè than Canon, in other words Nex-5N and Nex-7 have less than Canon RebelT4i or 7D, and this fact has been shown in dozens of tests by different users.

[hmcindie]

[quote name='riccardocovino' timestamp='1348472727' post='18965']
Maybe it wasn't clear, but I stated under 2K $ Sony has less moirè than Canon, in other words Nex-5N and Nex-7 have less than Canon RebelT4i or 7D, and this fact has been shown in dozens of tests by different users.
[/quote]

I have the Nex-5n and the 7d and that is 50% bullshit.

The nex-5n has slightly less moire/aliasing in 25p mode. When you switch to 50p the aliasing and moire DOUBLES. That is what apparently happens in the A99 too. Did you even watch that clip??

Show me one test by these "different users". Even better, show me ALL THE DOZENS of tests. It's funny how in the forums every half-truth is compounded all the time and soon the truth disappears and you have you people who say "dozens of tests" but can't produce even one. Or the one they produce is done horribly and the other comparison has been deinterlaced or shit like that. Ah...bloggers, love them.

[subsequent]

More Pocahontas please! :D

[riccardocovino]

[quote name='hmcindie' timestamp='1348475901' post='18966']
I have the Nex-5n and the 7d and that is 50% bullshit.

The nex-5n has slightly less moire/aliasing in 25p mode. When you switch to 50p the aliasing and moire DOUBLES. That is what apparently happens in the A99 too. Did you even watch that clip??

Show me one test by these "different users". Even better, show me ALL THE DOZENS of tests. It's funny how in the forums every half-truth is compounded all the time and soon the truth disappears and you have you people who say "dozens of tests" but can't produce even one. Or the one they produce is done horribly and the other comparison has been deinterlaced or shit like that. Ah...bloggers, love them.
[/quote]

Your way of talking is quite unpolite and pretentious.
You state I don't answer and disappear in the same post where you write the question, and that's quite stupid.
I'll answer to your trolling just once now because this is going clearly off-topic and I don't want to bother the other readers with futile arguments.

First: why you compare 50P Sony (highly compressed) to 25P in the Canon? That's totally useless, compare 25P top 25P.
What we are talking about is sensor's downscaling, not artifacts from compression.
50P takes 28Mbit while 25P takes 24Mbit, so almost the same for double frame rate, that means much higher compression, not faulty sensor downscaling.
Sony's 24 Mbit 25P has clearly less aliasing/moirè than Canon's 50Mbit 25P.

Second: I have to show you AT LEAST ONE of the tests proving that Sony sensor has less moirè and aliasing than canon's?
Here we are:

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xx_Nf99jLE"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xx_Nf99jLE[/url]

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNwSdqWbNJc"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNwSdqWbNJc[/url]

[url="http://vimeo.com/46037571"]http://vimeo.com/46037571[/url]

[url="http://vimeo.com/28751834"]http://vimeo.com/28751834[/url]

Now you can say whatever you want, I will not reply anymore for the sake of the real topic.

[TJB]

[quote name='subsequent' timestamp='1348487530' post='18968']
More Pocahontas please! :D
[/quote]

Yeah, I agree. More Pocahontas! There's something about her.... I don't know what it is...... I wish I could but .....I just can't put my finger on it.

I doubt that she lies awake at night wondering about moire and aliasing. :wub:

[tungah]

[quote name='TJB' timestamp='1348518379' post='18992']
Yeah, I agree. More Pocahontas! There's something about her.... I don't know what it is...... I wish I could but .....[b]I just can't put my finger on it.[/b]

I doubt that she lies awake at night wondering about moire and aliasing. :wub:
[/quote]

I see what you did there...
Andrew, thanks for all your work on Photohontas, I mean, Photokina.
Now please interview Pocahontas. The aliasing should appear on her hair.
Do it for the sake of the film-making community. We need this, man.

[Chrad]

Yes, Pocohantas looked good...we get it.

[themoviegeek]

Jeez! I don't get why [i]anyone's [/i]raving about this. It still looks so... video. Panasonic evidently haven't heard any of our complaints about the last generation. It looks like something you shoot reality TV for Channel 4 with. It is absolutely not what I was hoping for. Was looking for an alternative Alexa b-cam. But hey - Panasonic, maybe the GH4'll be worth writing home about, eh?[i] [/i]

[AdRath]

[quote name='themoviegeek' timestamp='1348586099' post='19031']
Jeez! I don't get why [i]anyone's [/i]raving about this. It still looks so... video. Panasonic evidently haven't heard any of our complaints about the last generation. It looks like something you shoot reality TV for Channel 4 with. It is absolutely not what I was hoping for. Was looking for an alternative Alexa b-cam. But hey - Panasonic, maybe the GH4'll be worth writing home about, eh?[i] [/i]
[/quote]

This has to be a troll post right? Alexa B-cam? for $1299? HAHAHAHA!

They didn't listen to complaints? I'd say they answered most of them

-DR
-Build quality
-Weatherproofing
-codec
-1080p 60
- Low light performance
-headphone jack
- Colour

I can't see anything to complain about for $1299.

[Policar]

[quote name='themoviegeek' timestamp='1348586099' post='19031']
Jeez! I don't get why [i]anyone's [/i]raving about this. It still looks so... video. Panasonic evidently haven't heard any of our complaints about the last generation. It looks like something you shoot reality TV for Channel 4 with. It is absolutely not what I was hoping for. Was looking for an alternative Alexa b-cam. But hey - Panasonic, maybe the GH4'll be worth writing home about, eh?[i] [/i]
[/quote]

The Alexa draws somewhere around 90 watts and the sensor (coincidentally, both are probably from sony) alone costs $20,000 and needs to be cooled with a fan. The camera is pretty huge and full of crazy proprietary technology, like the color that simulates Kodak Vision film stocks and the dual gain paths and all that. Even then it's a miracle that the Alexa is as good as it is. And even with the Alexa footage shot under this light would look bad.

The next best thing seems to be a C100 with an external recorder. You won't get Alexa highlights with anything but at least there you're getting the resolution, more flexibility with lenses (granted it's not PL mount) and likely somewhat better color.

And of course the GH3 would probably be a fine crash cam to intercut with Alexa footage...the Canon dSLRs are good enough and they're much softer.

[cameraboy]

ARRI ALEXA ALEV III sensor is made by Cypress (they sold their sensor production last year) ....
and price is not 20000$ , not even close ....

[sanveer]

i wish Panasonic would incorporate the GPS, as an option, in one of their grips. Leica is gr8. But, like all Leicas, seriously prohibitive pricing.

[KarimNassar]

[quote name='AdRath' timestamp='1348617622' post='19049']
This has to be a troll post right? Alexa B-cam? for $1299? HAHAHAHA!

They didn't listen to complaints? I'd say they answered most of them
-DR
[/quote]

please do share with me the footage you have seen that demonstrate higher dynamic range than on the gh2.
all I have personally seen are blown highlights and crushed blacks.

[quote name='AdRath' timestamp='1348617622' post='19049']
-codec
[/quote]

supposedly better codec but now has aliasing and moire so worse end image quality.
some of you guys say firmware might fix this...ok let's find out in due time I guess

[quote name='AdRath' timestamp='1348617622' post='19049']
- Low light performance
[/quote]

really? The only low light shots I've seen where the ones on reverie. And I don't know if you have downloaded the 1080p version but it shows heavy dirty color noise. The french guys vid is just bad looking and has no download option anyways so can't judge from the video compression.

All of the post I've seen from people being happy about the upgrade are only parroting the specs sheet.
Yes the specs sheets on paper are nice but I have personally not yet seen them translate to quality footage.
That is all that matter.
Remember a camera that has poor spec sheets but has great image quality?
Yeah the gh2.

[sanveer]

One complaint I've always had about the GH2, was the mediocre still photo quality. I saw this on Imaging Resource, and I feel, that the GH3 may have noticeably better photo quality. Some of the pics are seriously amazing.


[url="http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/panasonic-gh3/panasonic-gh3GALLERY.HTM"]http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/panasonic-gh3/panasonic-gh3GALLERY.HTM[/url]

[sanveer]

[quote name='KarimNassar' timestamp='1348732675' post='19098']
please do share with me the footage you have seen that demonstrate higher dynamic range than on the gh2.
all I have personally seen are blown highlights and crushed blacks.



supposedly better codec but now has aliasing and moire so worse end image quality.
some of you guys say firmware might fix this...ok let's find out in due time I guess



really? The only low light shots I've seen where the ones on reverie. And I don't know if you have downloaded the 1080p version but it shows heavy dirty color noise. The french guys vid is just bad looking and has no download option anyways so can't judge from the video compression.

All of the post I've seen from people being happy about the upgrade are only parroting the specs sheet.
Yes the specs sheets on paper are nice but I have personally not yet seen them translate to quality footage.
That is all that matter.
Remember a camera that has poor spec sheets but has great image quality?
Yeah the gh2.
[/quote]

Some of the videos doing the round, have the 14-140 lens, which is really not the lens for low light (the darker corners of the Photokina Panasonic Hall), if that is one of the videos you are referring to.

Also, like I mentioned before (and so did someone else), the Panny lenses produce some crazy moire and aliasing.

From what I've seen, I am a little disappointed with the video quality, on the GH3, as well. But, maybe, we should wait, till people get their hands on the GH3, and use non-panny lenses, along with faster lenses, in low light conditions.

[Axel]

[quote name='sanveer' timestamp='1348733415' post='19099']
One complaint I've always had about the GH2, was the mediocre still photo quality. I saw this on Imaging Resource, and I feel, that the GH3 may have noticeably better photo quality. Some of the pics are seriously amazing.


[url="http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/panasonic-gh3/panasonic-gh3GALLERY.HTM"]http://www.imaging-r...-gh3GALLERY.HTM[/url]
[/quote]

Someone should take the GH3, frame this
[img]http://216.18.212.226/PRODS/panasonic-gh3/THUMBSVAR/YPROTO0096.JPG[/img]
and pan left and right. You see the moire already in this smaller format. Fuckers. [i]Are[/i] in Cologne, [i]have[/i] the GH3 and [i]don't[/i] shoot the right video motifs!

[sanveer]

In the Full-Sized pic, I do not notice any moire. If you downsize, any pics, you're almost guaranteed, to notice moire. Please watch it at Full Resolution (Full Size).

Maybe, I didn't notice.

[Axel]

I know, but I bet, with any EOS you'd get moire with the organ pipes. Moire [i]is[/i] a scaling pattern.

[sanveer]

The downscaling (for video) isn't really an issue in the GH2. The whole moire and aliasing happens, probably due to some codec issues, where they try and resolve the chromatic aberration (I'm guessing). That is why, it happens with the Panny lenses