JVC LS-300 footage

[Noa Put]

Imo f2.8 is only for lowlight and sdof. The aperture I use most of the time is around f4-5.6.

That is not the main reason why I don't like f4.0 or slower lenses. Not many reviewers talk about this but this is not a good low light camera, in particular the noise pattern can get very ugly at 3200 iso. This iso is something you would try to avoid using anyway but with a f4.0 lens you might have to go there sooner then expected.

[Mattias Burling]

But thats what I said. I use f2.8 for lowlight and sdof :)

[Noa Put]

That's not what I said, I said it is to avoid shooting at higher iso's because the noise is so ugly. It's obvious you use faster glass for shooting in low light and have a shallower dof, only with most current dslr's or larger sensor camera's that is not much of an issue, with the jvc it is. F4.0 is just a very limiting f-stop for the jvc and you have to switch to a faster lens sooner then expected, not because you are shooting in a lower light environment or because you want a shallower dof but because the noise will ruin your shots. Eventhough there is no comparison but just to make a point, with a a7s you could shoot an entire wedding with a f4.0 lens, with the jvc you have to switch to a f2.0 and faster lens as soon as you arrive at the venue and if it's a candle light only venue you are even better of using a GH4.

[Mattias Burling]

Ok it seems we are derailing the thread so to sum up.
Yes I know, in lower light you use a bigger aperture such as f2.8 to avoid raising the ISO. Thats what both of us have said all along. No need to further explain the concept of exposure.

[Noa Put]

You still don't understand what I am saying and it has nothing to do with explaining exposure, you said "Imo f2.8 is only for lowlight and sdof." while I say you need faster glass on the jvc to stay clear from high iso's because it's such a noisy camera. Something that for whatever reason is not mentioned by anyone who is reviewing the camera, maybe JVC is paying them to say otherwise, I don't know, but it's the noisiest camera I have used since my t2i. It's not that the camera is not good, I like it a lot, but whenever I can I will put on the fastest glass I have and it's not for lowlight or sdof purposes.

[Petros Kolyvas]

Originally Posted by Noa Put

You still don't understand what I am saying and it has nothing to do with explaining exposure, you said "Imo f2.8 is only for lowlight and sdof." while I say you need faster glass on the jvc to stay clear from high iso's because it's such a noisy camera. Something that for whatever reason is not mentioned by anyone who is reviewing the camera, maybe JVC is paying them to say otherwise, I don't know, but it's the noisiest camera I have used since my t2i. It's not that the camera is not good, I like it a lot, but whenever I can I will put on the fastest glass I have and it's not for lowlight or sdof purposes.

I'm wandering in to this conversation like a child who wanders into a movie and wants... sorry lost my train of thought.

But yes, my experience is that this camera was surprisingly noisy but in a very odd, unpredictable way.

I just posted my thoughts on it near the bottom of my chroma keying testing here:
https://medium.com/@krispii_p/jvc-gy...f61#.9h7diaxat
(it's shamefully long)

I'm starting to think some of it may be spectrum related. Or perhaps we got bad sensors. Mine, though picked up only a couple of days ago, had firmware 1.02 on it, but I don't really know what I'm talking about there other than I wonder if it was from an early production run.

What I do know is that I mostly shoot with a nice enough new-generation Nikon 2.8 17-55 lens that I've used everywhere and this camera displays odd mid-tone noise and some fixed-pattern noise even at very modest gain levels. No gain even!

However my caveat is that every bit of my shooting thus far has been under very specific fluorescent lighting, which gives me pause, because, like you, I have read nothing but comments about the clean images.

I wonder if there isn't something else in these findings to explore - thought I fear they may simple end up as anecdotes since I don't really have time to test test test.

I might take it outside tomorrow and torture test it in the snow briefly. Because, yeah, that's right sometimes it snows in April. :(

[Mattias Burling]

Originally Posted by Noa Put

You still don't understand what I am saying and it has nothing to do with explaining exposure....

For the love of god, yes I know and Ive said it all along, now please stop repeating :)
ISO = Noise
Wide Aperture = More light
More light = Less ISO

Originally Posted by Petros Kolyvas

What I do know is that I mostly shoot with a nice enough new-generation Nikon 2.8 17-55 lens that I've used everywhere and this camera displays odd mid-tone noise and some fixed-pattern noise even at very modest gain levels. No gain even!

This is my finding as well. Just like you need to expose S-Log a bit hot for the shadows it seems the Mids are the J-Logs problem.
In daylight all is fine for me, in the dark everything is also fine.
The noise gets problematic at low contrast and somewhat under exposed Mids when grading.

The solutions so far has been,
Cine profile in those situations
Less grading
Expose down
Expose up

Ive uploaded some clips to youtube containing some of the FPN. They have been peeped by a couple of thousand viewers and they haven't commented on it since I took care of it with crushing the Mids in post.
IMO its just a matter of getting to know the camera. Its not Raw and only 8-bit so one cant get it all in terms of exposure, some sacrifices needs to be made. If the Mids are important but are being under exposed on a certain shot, blow the highlight.
Or light the scene.

[Noa Put]

Originally Posted by Petros Kolyvas

But yes, my experience is that this camera was surprisingly noisy but in a very odd, unpredictable way.

I am experiencing the same thing, I tested yesterday because it was discussed here and put it against my gh4 so I could have some comparison footage and to my surprise the jvc was cleaner then the gh4! But in Februari this year I shot a wedding with it and got some very nasty noise in the morning at the hairdresser with indoor light, much uglier then I ever had with my GH4 and that was at 3200 iso and I could clearly see it in my viewfinder as well while shooting. The remaining part of the day however my footage looks very clean.

I also saw this kind of noise when I first received my jvc and was testshooting during the day in my house, when I pointed the camera towards a window and exposed for that window I got some very obvious and ugly noise indoors, the noise reminded me of my canon 550d, it looked that bad and again nothing like I ever saw on my GH4. (I each time shot with the gamma set to itu709.)

I am going to see if I can replicate the problem the following days. I know it's there, I just need to figure under which conditions it roars it's ugly head. :)

[Mattias Burling]

Speaking of noise.

Impossible Shot Shootout/Review-- GH2, GH4, em5 mkII, JVC LS 300, Sony FS 5 - YouTube

[Petros Kolyvas]

Originally Posted by Mattias Burling

For the love of god, yes I know and Ive said it all along, now please stop repeating :)
ISO = Noise
Wide Aperture = More light
More light = Less ISO



This is my finding as well. Just like you need to expose S-Log a bit hot for the shadows it seems the Mids are the J-Logs problem.
In daylight all is fine for me, in the dark everything is also fine.
The noise gets problematic at low contrast and somewhat under exposed Mids when grading.

The solutions so far has been,
Cine profile in those situations
Less grading
Expose down
Expose up

Ive uploaded some clips to youtube containing some of the FPN. They have been peeped by a couple of thousand viewers and they haven't commented on it since I took care of it with crushing the Mids in post.
IMO its just a matter of getting to know the camera. Its not Raw and only 8-bit so one cant get it all in terms of exposure, some sacrifices needs to be made. If the Mids are important but are being under exposed on a certain shot, blow the highlight.
Or light the scene.

Dude! Thanks for that.

In my case I was shooting Rec701 because chroma key on an 8-bit compressed codec often negates the advantages of log, but still - this is a nice heads up, thanks for sharing in such detail.

As for the video posted - also thanks. I think there's a lot to like in this camera for the $4K CDN it set us back. I mean, the list of things to like is way longer than that to dislike and my observations about noise are just that, observations. It's still a highly useful too; with lots packed in.

[Noa Put]

Attached is a shot of the ls300 at 6400iso, I know it's much underexposed but this is just to show what kind of noise I saw in the shadows on a shot taken indoor with a window in the frame and part of a indoor wall where I exposed for the window.
Thing is, I"m not getting the same problem now so have no idea what has caused it before, so unless I am able to replicate it during any of my following shoots I have to reconsider my thoughts on the noise level of this camera. I"ll just have to wait and see. Maybe the camera just needed some warming up. :)

[Mattias Burling]

If you look at 04:00, at the cow in this video.
I ETTR shot that clip, and in the ungraded footage there is no silhouette. The entire cow is visible, every hair.
It looks like a 14 stop DR image.

But when graded it all turned super ugly and FPN.
So I crushed it down to a more reasonable level. I would say with a contrast more representing what the scene looked like IRL. And more in the 12stop region.

Usable imo.

5 Reasons to Buy a JVC LS300 - YouTube

Here is a some what untouched example,

[Steve Rosen]

I've had a couple of FPN issues as well, less than with some other cameras - and certainly not as distressing as, say, the moire on Black Magic footage. But when that noise does happen in the shadows, it is distracting enough to draw the eye... not good. The suggestions for avoiding it above are good ones for - as I said - any of the myriad of large sensor cameras that do this... however...

I once had a similar (although not as bad) issue with my Canon C100... because I forgot to black balance after changing lenses. Canon advises doing that, not because of a difference in the lenses, but because it can forget what black is. Unfortunately the LS300 doesn't have a black balance function (I'm told it does black balance automatically when booted, but I haven't seen proof of that).

[Mattias Burling]

I did some experiments with Cine Gamma ysterday and it is much tougher in low contrast situations imo. The sacrifice is some highligt roll of.

Cant wait to try it more but dont have the camera for another week.

[Petros Kolyvas]

We have another paying gig with it tomorrow. Will be uncontrolled, most likely outdoors with a very wide range - so a good chance to check JLOG out in anger.