Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: GH3 Field Test with Video and Stills  (Read 8405 times)
TCSJordan
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8


« on: November 13, 2012, 11:54:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Hey guys,

I was fortunate enough to use a pre-production GH3 for a few days.  I filmed this video about the camera, with my host Chris Niccolls.  If you have any questions, I'll do my best to answer them. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIJTfu9Kpqk

Jordan Drake @ The Camera Store TV
Logged
RFPhotography
Guest
« Reply #1 on: November 14, 2012, 08:10:45 AM »
ReplyReply

A ten and a half minute 'Panasonic commercial' with about a minute and a half of actual video from the camera?  How relevant and informative is that supposed to be? 
Logged
Chris Sanderson
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 1902



« Reply #2 on: November 14, 2012, 11:17:11 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for the video Jordan. I agree with all your main points pro & con. You covered a lot!
Logged

Christopher Sanderson
The Luminous-Landscape
JimGoshorn
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 173



« Reply #3 on: November 14, 2012, 03:22:15 PM »
ReplyReply

Jordan,

Does the focus tracking system in the GH3 track moving subjects better than the OMD does?

Jim
Logged
TCSJordan
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8


« Reply #4 on: November 14, 2012, 04:40:00 PM »
ReplyReply

Even with the pre-production firmware, the GH3 seems to track focus better than the OMD. I was especially impressed with how it followed a subject even with a busy foreground, like the deer footage at 8:40.  I'll be doing more detailed comparisons once we see a camera with production firmware.
Logged
bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1095


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #5 on: June 14, 2013, 09:39:08 AM »
ReplyReply

Even with the pre-production firmware, the GH3 seems to track focus better than the OMD. I was especially impressed with how it followed a subject even with a busy foreground, like the deer footage at 8:40.  I'll be doing more detailed comparisons once we see a camera with production firmware.

I have both, two gh3's, one omd, but with the winders.

Thought the gh3's would be video cameras, the omd still.

In slow moving imagery the gh3 focuses twice as well as the omd, though not as smooth i.s. as the omd in body i.s..

Yesterday shooting for real life in pressure situations, the OMD under fast quick focusing and movement, would focus better.

Interesting that the gh3 at 72mbs in my original tests our performed the omd 2 to 1 in video, but in real world working I can barely see a difference.

Also the OMD sees to be one stop faster than the gh3 (but that's just early impressions).

Regardless there both great cameras, the omd, amazingly sharp stills, the gh3 slightly more moveable in post production stills and video.

IMO

BC

Logged

fredjeang2
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 791



« Reply #6 on: June 14, 2013, 09:53:06 AM »
ReplyReply

I have both, two gh3's, one omd, but with the winders.

Thought the gh3's would be video cameras, the omd still.

In slow moving imagery the gh3 focuses twice as well as the omd, though not as smooth i.s. as the omd in body i.s..

Yesterday shooting for real life in pressure situations, the OMD under fast quick focusing and movement, would focus better.

Interesting that the gh3 at 72mbs in my original tests our performed the omd 2 to 1 in video, but in real world working I can barely see a difference.

Also the OMD sees to be one stop faster than the gh3 (but that's just early impressions).

Regardless there both great cameras, the omd, amazingly sharp stills, the gh3 slightly more moveable in post production stills and video.

IMO

BC



The thing is that 72mbs for an INTRA is only just (100 is considered as the lowest). In the end, a long GOP codec like the one in the Oly at a lowest datarate would deliver a very very similar output.

To see a drastic and visible improvement, the GH3 INTRA should be twice the bitrate of the factory (but as they protect their pro gear)
but the hackers will remedy to this very soon.

I can see on the GH2 significant (really visible, and specialy in delicate situations) improvements in INTRA hack runned at about 150 Mb/s. Below that not really, at arround 60-70 not at all.
Because as each frame is recorded "fullrez" unlike in the long GOPs, it needs a higher recording datas otherwise the frames aren't top quality.

So what you see comparing both coincide with my experience. Pana limited on purpose the GH3 but this is only a matter of time until you could put your hands on a
great hack and then, you'll see a significant jump in quality, as well as file size too. Then, the Oly will be clearly behind, but from factory not that much.
My GH2 INTRA is 1 GB per 2 minutes footage average. Stable hack.

What also has drastic consequences is the VBR. I'd be eternaly thankfull to the hackers if they could provide a CBR instead, like they did with the motionJPEG.
Because this has absolutly visible consequences on the possible compression artefacts on plane surfaces. I mean, it's simply not happening with a CBR.
Files become then really big but everything is free of hassles.
Of course, this aint any longuer the spirit of highly compressed codecs for adquisition but tends towards big files, lots of recorded datas very much in the spirit of an Alexa shooting
Prores except for the 8bits. But the increments in file size is worth without doubt.
« Last Edit: June 14, 2013, 10:16:04 AM by fredjeang2 » Logged
bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1095


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #7 on: June 14, 2013, 10:13:57 AM »
ReplyReply

The thing is that 72mbs for an INTRA is only just (100 is considered as the lowest). In the end, a long GOP codec like the one in the Oly at a lowest datarate would deliver a very very similar output.

To see a drastic and visible improvement, the GH3 INTRA should be twice the bitrate of the factory (but as they protect their pro gear)
but the hackers will remedy to this very soon.

I can see on the GH2 significant (really visible, and specialy in delicate situations) improvements in INTRA hack runned at about 150 Mb/s. Below that not really, at arround 60-70 not at all.
Because as each frame is recorded "fullrez" unlike in the long GOPs, it needs a higher recording datas otherwise the frames aren't top quality.

So what you see comparing both coincide with my experience. Pana limited on purpose the GH3 but this is only a matter of time until you could put your hands on a
great hack and then, you'll see a significant jump in quality, as well as file size too. Then, the Oly will be clearly behind, but from factory not that much.
My GH2 INTRA is 1 GB per 2 minutes footage average. Stable hack.

What also has drastic consequences is the VBR. I'd be eternaly thankfull to the hackers if they could provide a CBR instead, like they did with the motionJPEG.
Because this has absolutly visible consequences on the possible compression artefacts on plane surfaces. I mean, it's simply not happening with a CBR.
Files become then really big but everything is free of hassles.

Fred,

How do you record 100 mbs when most cards only go to 70 or so mbs?

I love the Pana, understand it's value, think Panasonic and all makers should stop protecting market.   It's frustrating as hell.

Then again the little black magic camera that uses 4/3 lenses might change that.

The Olyumpus stabilization is bloody amazing.

Really, let's you do things you just wouldn't think possible.

IMO

BC
Logged

fredjeang2
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 791



« Reply #8 on: June 14, 2013, 10:17:09 AM »
ReplyReply

Fred,

How do you record 100 mbs when most cards only go to 70 or so mbs?


Records stable 150 mbs with the Scandisk extreme. No crash. No freeze. Never had just one prob.

They recommend (the hackers) this brand and model.

No idea how the card can do it, but it bloody does.

I only use this model: http://www.lambda-tek.com/SDSDX-016G-X46-SANDISK-EXTREME-SDHC-16GB-30MB-S~csES/B463630&origin=gbaseES13.4
100% reliable, included some shooted at more than 200 mb/s and no prob.
« Last Edit: June 14, 2013, 10:20:59 AM by fredjeang2 » Logged
bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1095


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #9 on: June 14, 2013, 10:21:45 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks, Fred.

BC
Logged

fredjeang2
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 791



« Reply #10 on: June 14, 2013, 10:32:52 AM »
ReplyReply

On my card link, there was a controvertial debate. This is not the latest Scandisk technology. Some say that this model (the one I use) is better and more stable than the newest versions.
Other sources say the opposite.(that we should always buy the newest released)
I don't really know. All I know is that as it's been working for me (and many others) with 100% stability in high bitrate, I simply didn't bother to change or test latest ScanDisk Extreme versions.
Why changing something that works?
« Last Edit: June 14, 2013, 10:46:28 AM by fredjeang2 » Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad