Michael Thames Posted June 6, 2014 Share Posted June 6, 2014 I'm just kidding! I'm not a professional, nor do I know the significance of all the trends in the film world, because I upload basically to YoTube. I do know that when I look at the footage from the GH4, yes it looks sharp, but that sharpens makes it look more like video to my ignorant eyes. If I owned one the first thing I would invest in are some Tiffen softening filters..... seriously! It also looks compressed as opposed to 5D3. The 5D3 looks smooth and creamy, and spacious compared to the stark sharpness of the GH4. I always associate sharpness with video, and smoothness with film. Perhaps pixel peepers get excited, but your average Joe or Jane, is gonna prefer the 5D3 I think, or they won't have an opinion one way or the other. Also, when was the last time your employers asked for a GH4? I've heard from others that people ask if you have a Canon 5D, to get the job. Super sharp video that's not so good in low light? Hum..... Anyway, Just had to get that of my chest, now back to the topic of how superior the GH4 with the tiny little sensor is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oliver Daniel Posted June 6, 2014 Share Posted June 6, 2014 This post is a little bit pointless. It doesn't matter what camera you use, as long as it suits you, looks good and gets the job done. If you buy a camera for status then you are not a filmmaker. A camera does not operate you. You operate the camera. So when that comes to the GH4, it is very capable in the right hands. Daniel Acuña 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inazuma Posted June 6, 2014 Share Posted June 6, 2014 Why did this need its own topic? There are already plenty of GH4 threads you could've slipped this garbage in. To get a great image out of the 5D3 you need to shoot RAW, which has its issues (stability, storage, etc). Otherwise you get something inferior to the GH3 even ( Daniel Acuña 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Thames Posted June 6, 2014 Author Share Posted June 6, 2014 This post is a little bit pointless. It doesn't matter what camera you use, as long as it suits you, looks good and gets the job done. If you buy a camera for status then you are not a filmmaker. A camera does not operate you. You operate the camera. So when that comes to the GH4, it is very capable in the right hands. I agree sharpness is King....... I mean content is King! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Thames Posted June 6, 2014 Author Share Posted June 6, 2014 Why did this need its own topic? There are already plenty of GH4 threads you could've slipped this garbage in. To get a great image out of the 5D3 you need to shoot RAW, which has its issues (stability, storage, etc). Otherwise you get something inferior to the GH3 even (> ). If you don't like the sharpness of the GH4, there are many ways to soften it (you already mentioned one). But IMO sharpness does not make a video-ish image. Poor choices in framing, grading, etc make video-ish images. And the GH4 does fine in low light. Just not as good as the 5d (which is a low light monster). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Acuña Posted June 6, 2014 Share Posted June 6, 2014 This topic is really pointless, of course you haven't seen any amazing footage (even if there is...) because the camera just came out a few months ago people are still working around it and learning about it, 5D mark III and mark II have being around for quite some time now, so it's obvious the footage is going to seem better... Of course content is King but having more pixels helps... Just wait for Phil Bloom review and you will see what he can do with a GH4 and you will understand that it is not the camera but the guy behind it that is important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Thames Posted June 6, 2014 Author Share Posted June 6, 2014 And the GH4 does fine in low light. Just not as good as the 5d (which is a low light monster). People will pay $200,000 for a Ferrari that goes 200 miles an hour, and they will pay one million for one that goes 210 miles per hour, because that will win the race. I don't know about you but, the MAIN reason I purchased a 5D3 was it's low light ability, and you pay for what you get, you pay more for the low light monster! I suffered long enough with video cameras that were very bad in low light situations...... yes they were sharp but they were video cameras. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Thames Posted June 6, 2014 Author Share Posted June 6, 2014 This topic is really pointless, of course you haven't seen any amazing footage (even if there is...) because the camera just came out a few months ago people are still working around it and learning about it, 5D mark III and mark II have being around for quite some time now, so it's obvious the footage is going to seem better... Of course content is King but having more pixels helps... Just wait for Phil Bloom review and you will see what he can do with a GH4 and you will understand that it is not the camera but the guy behind it that is important. If this post is so pointless (which it is not) why the response? I've seen quite a bit of footage from the GH4 so far and yes it's good, but like I said, it's a bit too sharp and looks like video to me rather than film....... and that's my point! And yes I don't need a lecture about creativity and content...... that's not the point! It's just something I noticed between these two cameras. There is an awful lot of Canon bashing going on around the GH4 mania, so I thought I'd say something positive in the 5D3's favor. It like every post here is now about the GH4 and yes, I understand there is a lot of money to be made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inazuma Posted June 6, 2014 Share Posted June 6, 2014 Oh lighten up! Just having some fun at the expense of the present GH4 mania! I will lighten up (not that im actually angry) when people stop making the same nonsensical/ill-informed arguments about why one camera is better than the other. My favourite is the "sharp = video" one, which makes no sense because I've never used a video camera that has been as sharp as DSLR footage. Unless we're talking about those ones that cost tens of thousands that are used in sports stadiums. themartist 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Thames Posted June 6, 2014 Author Share Posted June 6, 2014 I will lighten up (not that im actually angry) when people stop making the same nonsensical/ill-informed arguments about why one camera is better than the other. My favourite is the "sharp = video" one, which makes no sense because I've never used a video camera that has been as sharp as DSLR footage. Unless we're talking about those ones that cost tens of thousands that are used in sports stadiums. Oh really? come on now, you have never heard the comparison of sharp = video look? I've be painfully aware of that comparison, ever since I bought my XH-A1 eight years ago, and is one of the main reasons I got the 5D3. Another videographer and I were talking just the other day about how the 5D3 looks so warm and smooth to his video cameras that show every detail on his face. I don't know how such a comparison has slipped on by you! BTW, I'm not saying GH4 looks like video, but that the sharpness makes it more video like, than the 5D3. Please refrain from calling me nonsensical/ill-informed, it makes you sound angry and defensive..... even if you claim otherwise.....ha ha! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest d5f8611fa423d0e628c016f9d5c93b47 Posted June 6, 2014 Share Posted June 6, 2014 I don't know about you but, the MAIN reason I purchased a 5D3 was it's low light ability, and you pay for what you get, you pay more for the low light monster! The Nikon D5300 is superior to the 5D3 in low light and costs less than 1/3 of the Canon. It also has 60p, better dynamic range, a tilt screen, cinematic S35 sized sensor, smaller form factor, etc etc. Spending money on a 5DIII if you don't intend to shoot ML RAW is the result of either lazy research or brand-vanity - the 5D is the most famous video DSLR but it's far from the best. andy lee 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Hughes Posted June 6, 2014 Share Posted June 6, 2014 Oh really? come on now, you have never heard the comparison of sharp = video look? I've be painfully aware of that comparison, ever since I bought my XH-A1 eight years ago, and is one of the main reasons I got the 5D3. Another videographer and I were talking just the other day about how the 5D3 looks so warm and smooth to his video cameras that show every detail on his face. I don't know how such a comparison has slipped on by you! Too bad there's no way to reduce the sharpness of a video! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgharding Posted June 6, 2014 Share Posted June 6, 2014 Personally I'm quite reserved when it comes to new cameras, and like to form my opinions over time. Mania or otherwise, working together is the best way to work out what's good and bad about a tool, that's what I like about forums. I think softening in post is fine, just a little fast blur if you want to smooth up like Alexa. I use this on C100 and C300 and it works with GH4 too.Try it! It's not sacrilege, it's actually pretty nice. Once you get over what you're doing and concentrate on the result you'll be happy with a softer look. I'd like to see how a Tiffen Ultra Contrast 1,2 or 3 works with it to put a little more detail in the blacks, but Tiffen softening tends to look 80s. I think the softening is best left to post, personally. Truth is, it's the only way to get 4K for such a low price, and the speed booster makes it Super 35. I've not yet made my mind up whether it's for me, but I won't call it either way til I've gathered enough knowledge and experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Thames Posted June 6, 2014 Author Share Posted June 6, 2014 Too bad there's no way to reduce the sharpness of a video! Well the point is, why buy a camera for sharpness if you are going un-sharpen? With the 5D3 I add about 10% sharpness. If I were you I'd look into some instruction videos on softening in post..... not sure what software you are using ......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Thames Posted June 6, 2014 Author Share Posted June 6, 2014 The Nikon D5300 is superior to the 5D3 in low light and costs less than 1/3 of the Canon. It also has 60p, better dynamic range, a tilt screen, cinematic S35 sized sensor, smaller form factor, etc etc. Spending money on a 5DIII if you don't intend to shoot ML RAW is the result of either lazy research or brand-vanity - the 5D is the most famous video DSLR but it's far from the best. OH MY GOD! Yea everyone is selling their 5D3's and running out to buy a Nikkon D5300...... ha ha! Lazy research indeed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Thames Posted June 6, 2014 Author Share Posted June 6, 2014 Personally I'm quite reserved when it comes to new cameras, and like to form my opinions over time. Mania or otherwise, working together is the best way to work out what's good and bad about a tool, that's what I like about forums. I think softening in post is fine, just a little fast blur if you want to smooth up like Alexa. I use this on C100 and C300 and it works with GH4 too.Try it! It's not sacrilege, it's actually pretty nice. Once you get over what you're doing and concentrate on the result you'll be happy with a softer look. I'd like to see how a Tiffen Ultra Contrast 1,2 or 3 works with it to put a little more detail in the blacks, but Tiffen softening tends to look 80s. I think the softening is best left to post, personally. Truth is, it's the only way to get 4K for such a low price, and the speed booster makes it Super 35. I've not yet made my mind up whether it's for me, but I won't call it either way til I've gathered enough knowledge and experience. So far the most humane response to my lighthearted post. I agree about the 4K and if that's the direction your are heading in then it's a consideration for sure. But, most of the posts are about how sharp it is, and an awful lot of Canon bashing going on as we have witnessed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest d5f8611fa423d0e628c016f9d5c93b47 Posted June 6, 2014 Share Posted June 6, 2014 OH MY GOD! Yea everyone is selling their 5D3's and running out to buy a Nikkon D5300...... ha ha! Lazy research indeed! Lazy retort. You can't expect to come on to this forum, which is largely populated with Panny-loving camera nerds, and say "I don't know shit but I think my shiny new 5D, which is the camera everybody said was great 2 years ago, is better than a GH4" and not expect to get pulled up on it. You evaded my point. You said you bought the 5D for low light. Why didn't you buy a D5300? Because loads of people buy the 5D! Great reason to waste $2000 ... dafreaking and Daniel Acuña 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Thames Posted June 6, 2014 Author Share Posted June 6, 2014 The Nikon D5300 is superior to the 5D3 in low light and costs less than 1/3 of the Canon. It also has 60p, better dynamic range, a tilt screen, cinematic S35 sized sensor, smaller form factor, etc etc. Spending money on a 5DIII if you don't intend to shoot ML RAW is the result of either lazy research or brand-vanity - the 5D is the most famous video DSLR but it's far from the best. Did a Canon 5D3 abuse you when you were just a wee lad? First off the D5300 does not have a better dynamic range. It actually looks quite washed out if you ask me. I don't ever use 60p. I wanted a FF camera not a S35. The 5D3 is much better at ISO above 6400........I'm not Lazy, but you are right, I do HAVE brand vanity! A dragster and a Ferrari both will go 200 miles an hour, but yes I'm vain, I would rather be cursing around town in a Ferrari! I do enjoy telling people they used the 5D3 to film half the commercials you see on TV, the opening of Saturday night Live, and some parts of Star Wars! They think I'm really good, when I'm not! It does make a difference! If you don't know how much of a difference it makes then you are kidding yourself, or in denial. I can go buy some clip on lights at home depot, and show up to a video shoot, or I can have some professional lights. This makes a huge difference in what your clients think! Show them you dinky Nikkon D5300 .....or the 5D3, the 5D looks like a profession camera with one of those long white lens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Thames Posted June 6, 2014 Author Share Posted June 6, 2014 Lazy retort. You can't expect to come on to this forum, which is largely populated with Panny-loving camera nerds, and say "I don't know shit but I think my shiny new 5D, which is the camera everybody said was great 2 years ago, is better than a GH4" and not expect to get pulled up on it. You evaded my point. You said you bought the 5D for low light. Why didn't you buy a D5300? Because loads of people buy the 5D! Great reason to waste $2000 ... You are a LAZY reader...... you should focus on your reading comprehend skills a little better. I know a little more than I give myself credit for lets put it that way. I never said one was better than the other, that is a little straw man you created, after you introduced a different camera entirely! I would never say that in the company of such Panny-lovers! I don't know much, but I do know better than to hang myself in public. I choose my words carefully unlike you who are all over the map. I said the 5D3 has a more film like look, and GH4 a sharper image which looks more video like....... so shoot me! I have even read these very words by others here on this forum...... I also said, the 5D3 is better in low light, and please correct me if I'm wrong about that. This was said in context of the GH4 and the 5D3. The GH4 has the advantage of 4K. I never said one was better than the other, just responding to the number of post on this forum about the GH4, (almost every other post) in a joking manner, and you have a ballistic moment, and get all serious and Shit! Now to answer your stupid question as to why I bought a Canon 5D iii...... better resale, better image, and I mean figuratively as well as it improves my "image" with the ladies, and the fact I have a lot of money invested in some glass...... Canon glass! It would be pretty stupid of me to buy a D5300 which I don't want in the first place, and then have to invest in more glass. Something you never considered? mtheory 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest d5f8611fa423d0e628c016f9d5c93b47 Posted June 6, 2014 Share Posted June 6, 2014 I'm not Lazy, but you are right, I do HAVE brand vanity! A dragster and a Ferrari both will go 200 miles an hour, but yes I'm vain, I would rather be cursing around town in a Ferrari! I do enjoy telling people they used the 5D3 to film half the commercials you see on TV, the opening of Saturday night Live, and some parts of Star Wars! They think I'm really good, when I'm not! It does make a difference! If you don't know how much of a difference it makes then you are kidding yourself, or in denial. I can go buy some clip on lights at home depot, and show up to a video shoot, or I can have some professional lights. This makes a huge difference in what your clients think! Show them you dinky Nikkon D5300 .....or the 5D3, the 5D looks like a profession camera with one of those long white lens. OK that's cool, you're different to me. I'm more interested in actually being good for real. And working with people who know I am. And no, I don't have anything against the 5D. Even in non-RAW mode I think it's superb. But so is the D5300. I just don't like it when people who don't know their stuff try and validate their purchases on forums like this and then get all high and mighty about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts