DV Info Net

DV Info Net (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)
-   Panasonic LUMIX S / G / GF / GH / GX Series (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/panasonic-lumix-s-g-gf-gh-gx-series/)
-   -   GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/panasonic-lumix-s-g-gf-gh-gx-series/510714-gh3-buzz-buzz-b-buzz.html)

Kevin Janisch September 18th, 2012 02:49 PM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
Ergonomics alone may be worth it to me. Handheld with the GH2 is just as bad if not worse than handheld with the Canon XL2.

Thomas Smet September 18th, 2012 03:47 PM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Adrian Frearson (Post 1754022)
Been following the rumours and release over the last few days. This looks like a really good update to the line and Panasonic are going in the right direction. It really does seem as though they've tried to create a mini AF100 ( minus XLR, ND etc. ) and judging from the videos I've seen, the gradation in the highlights does seem to be improved. Hoping that the new processing/sensor/codec codec helps the banding issue and low light noise. With the lens package, looks a great deal.

On the XLR issue, imaging resource have said that Panasonic will introduce an XLR adapter, which should feed into the 3.5 jack. I guess any XLR adapter will work anyway, but it's another option.

" On "pre-order" offer here in the UK, body only, at £1500 odd, that's about $2,250! "

Wex have it at this price, but the MSRP I've seen is £1099/1200euro body only. Hopefully they'll rectify their "mistake" once they've creamed a few desperate pre orders :-)

While audio recording on the GH3 may still not be perfect the additions are huge. With the GH1 and the GH2 we virtually had no way of controlling the audio or checking to hear what kind of audio was going into the camera.

1. 3.5mm input jack now means no more microscopic audio adapters with a flimsy connector. Still not perfect but 3.5mm can be good if you treat it right.
2. Supposedly better audio level controls. We still need to see what this means but if it includes manual level adjustment we can finally record audio without the AGC jacking up the levels when somebody stops talking.
3. 3.5mm output jack to hook up to headphones or external sound system. This is huge because we can finally hear how the audio going into the camera is going to sound. We just could not do that before without recording a clip first.

So we can now actually feel like we can run decent audio through the GH3. It will not be the same level of audio as a high end video camera with independent XLR audio channels but it is a massive step in the right direction and honestly almost worth the upgrade price alone if you shoot event video. With these features hooking up a XLR to 3.5mm type device actually would now work since you can tweak the audio levels and listen with your headphones what you are getting in the camera.

It is crazy how liberating something as stupid as a headphone jack can be.

William Hohauser September 18th, 2012 03:59 PM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin Janisch (Post 1754090)
Ergonomics alone may be worth it to me. Handheld with the GH2 is just as bad if not worse than handheld with the Canon XL2.

Once I attached the Varavon LCD EX-Supporter loupe, the GH2 became very stabile for handheld, even with non-stabilized lenses. I assume that the same will be true for the GH3.

Jeff Harper September 18th, 2012 04:32 PM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
Thomas, the GH2 does have audio input control, the recommended setting is on 2nd bar. I use it always, and no issues for wedding work. I use mics with switches that offers me further control For loud environments I hit the minus switch, and for softer I put the mic on +, and it works really well. True there is no headphone jack, but for general purposes, especially since I use my cams and 3rd and 4th cams, they work just great.

I"m sure things will be much improved on the GH3, but I'm used the GH2 for a variety of projects, and it's come through every time.

Kevin Janisch September 18th, 2012 05:00 PM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by William Hohauser (Post 1754118)
Once I attached the Varavon LCD EX-Supporter loupe, the GH2 became very stabile for handheld, even with non-stabilized lenses. I assume that the same will be true for the GH3.

I think my biggest gripe is with the miniscule hand grip. It appears that the GH3 grip solves this issue for me.

Jeff Harper September 18th, 2012 05:28 PM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
The HDR feature on this camera makes is REALLY interesting from a photography point of view. Wow. I want me one of these. "To cope with the extreme bright and dark contrast that you get, for example, with backlighting, consecutive photos are taken with different exposure levels and overlapped. Blown highlights and blocked shadows are then deleted and a single photo is composed."

There are so many new features and improvements on the camera that it will not stay in stock anywhere for a long time. I predict it will be a phenomenon. The more I read about it the clearer it becomes this is a monumental release.

DMC-GH3 | PRODUCTS | LUMIX | Digital Camera | Panasonic Global

Thomas Smet September 18th, 2012 08:21 PM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Harper (Post 1754127)
Thomas, the GH2 does have audio input control, the recommended setting is on 2nd bar. I use it always, and no issues for wedding work. I use mics with switches that offers me further control For loud environments I hit the minus switch, and for softer I put the mic on +, and it works really well. True there is no headphone jack, but for general purposes, especially since I use my cams and 3rd and 4th cams, they work just great.

I"m sure things will be much improved on the GH3, but I'm used the GH2 for a variety of projects, and it's come through every time.

Very true but it still didnt offer full control and was more of a cross your fingers because you didnt really know what was being recorded. The GH2 was lightyears ahead of the GH1 and honestly I have been very happy with how the GH2 handles audio. In fact very impressed by how well it handles my wireless mics.

When the GH2 however is your only camera it is nice to be able to listen to the audio.

Chip Thome September 18th, 2012 10:35 PM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
I am sure just like everyone else, I've been trying to suck up as much information on this as I can. To me the biggest reason to upgrade:

DYNAMIC RANGE

I am so tired of washed out colors that I could just scream !!! So the DR is huge for me, if the DR improvement is HUGE as well.

I'm not shooting as often as most of you, if I was, I'd probably already have it on order. My first impression of seeing the images of it was "there's a lot of buttons and a huge learning curve staring me in the face". So I am now thinking this is an "investment" of both dollars and time. OK, I'm good with investing. Then it occurs to me that this investment has a lifespan of maybe 22 months, from first release to the next new cam announcement. If it runs like my GH2 pre-order, it's more like a 20.5 month lifepan from receiving to the GH3 announcement. That's when I wished that Panasonic was on a 3 year schedule for its model upgrades. At the rate I shoot at now, in 3 years I would know this GH3 inside and out and be ready then to move on to the next level.

I got my GH1 from Amazon on a weekend deal for $995 w/14-140. The GH2 I preordered from some place in Indiana and that was $888 with the beater 14-42, This one is going to be $1299 and they aren't even throwing in a piece of crap lens for that. That's $410 over the GH2 and $300 over the GH1 kit. So not sure what anyone else is doing, but at this time I am sitting on the sdielines for either actual DR comparative examples from regular users, or a super sweet preorder deal from somewhere. For $1299, I think the upgades that were announced make it worth it. FOR ME, I am not seeing enough time though, to be able to get to experience all this new camera is capable of, before the next one must have camera comes out.

As always, YMMV.

Thomas Smet September 19th, 2012 06:18 AM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
If you have used a GH1 and a GH2 there will not be much of a learning curve. Most of the core functions will be the same. It just has a couple of extra function buttons and the controls are arranged a bit different. Honestly you would adapt in hours.

Bill Bruner September 19th, 2012 02:19 PM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
New GH3 video from Emmanuel Pampuri. Basses lumieres (low light) with the preproduction Panasonic GH3. ISO 1600/3200 with fast lenses. A "FS-100 like" performance.

Panasonic GH3 Prototype video test 2 "Paris / Karl Line / Le Louvre on Vimeo

Impressive for a beta firmware camera -- but, truthfully, doesn't look much better (to me, at least) than a hacked GH2 with fast lenses:

Night Test Voigtlander Nokton 17.5mm f/0.95 Venice on Vimeo

Jeff Harper September 19th, 2012 03:00 PM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
I see a vastly improved dynamic range in the images, particularly with the girl against the lit up building. Superb.

Mike Leah September 19th, 2012 04:39 PM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
Looks like 1299 body only.

David Heath September 19th, 2012 05:05 PM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Chip Thome (Post 1754172)
I am sure just like everyone else, I've been trying to suck up as much information on this as I can. To me the biggest reason to upgrade:

DYNAMIC RANGE.

Just so everybody is absolutely sure what we're talking about, the dynamic range improvements are solely when taking STILL photographs, **NOT** video.

That should be clear from what is said about it:
Quote:

"To cope with the extreme bright and dark contrast that you get, for example, with backlighting, consecutive photos are taken with different exposure levels and overlapped. Blown highlights and blocked shadows are then deleted and a single photo is composed."
Note "consecutive photos are taken with different exposure levels and overlapped"

I'd also be wary about worrying too much about the 1080p/60. The GH2 resolution true resolution was close to 700 lines - which is within the abilities of the 720p/60 system. Having 1080p/60 recording in camera won't make a lot of difference - you may as well blow the 720p up in post. In fact, it may even be WORSE, you're using your bitrate to encode a bigger raster with no more real information in it - hence likely more artifacting.

All that said, the GH3 looks pretty good for what it is and the price. Just keep in mind it is first and foremost a stills camera, and in the consumer camp.

David Heath September 19th, 2012 05:11 PM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Harper (Post 1754288)
I see a vastly improved dynamic range in the images, particularly with the girl against the lit up building. Superb.

But she's lit - I don't see how it's possible to draw any conclusion about the camera dynamic range therefore? (And nice lighting I have to say.)

Don Litten September 19th, 2012 05:51 PM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
Personal views did an interview with Panasonic at Photokina.

Here is a transcript:
questions:dieter-knuettel-questions [Photokina 2012 coverage]

I'm becoming less impressed with this camera all the time.

William Hohauser September 19th, 2012 06:04 PM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
The video is interesting, not bad for available light (sodium street lights according to the film maker who did a good job posing the model to the lights). It certainly looks cleaner than the GH2 would be in the same situation at ISO3200. Dynamic range, it might be better.

Thomas Smet September 19th, 2012 07:06 PM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by David Heath (Post 1754306)
Just so everybody is absolutely sure what we're talking about, the dynamic range improvements are solely when taking STILL photographs, **NOT** video.

That should be clear from what is said about it:

Note "consecutive photos are taken with different exposure levels and overlapped"

I'd also be wary about worrying too much about the 1080p/60. The GH2 resolution true resolution was close to 700 lines - which is within the abilities of the 720p/60 system. Having 1080p/60 recording in camera won't make a lot of difference - you may as well blow the 720p up in post. In fact, it may even be WORSE, you're using your bitrate to encode a bigger raster with no more real information in it - hence likely more artifacting.

All that said, the GH3 looks pretty good for what it is and the price. Just keep in mind it is first and foremost a stills camera, and in the consumer camp.

Those are two totally different things. What is quoted there is the form of HDR mode Panasonic added to the GH3. It is used to create a sort of HDR photography look which is interesting if you like that sort of thing. Dynamic range is totally different.

Also the 1080p60 I have seen from the GH3 looks more detailed then 720p. It isn't always about resolving detail. 1080p60 has more chroma resolution 960x540 instead of 640x360 and can offer a cleaner video because it doesn't have to be scaled up. Nothing makes compression artifacts stand out more then scaling them up. If you start at native size you never have to scale it up. Plus the H264 encoder in the camera seems like it is going to be much more robust then the one found in the GH2. There was a discussion on how the new encoder can use 8x8 pixel blocks instead of the normal 4x4 of the GH2. This helps the encoder be more efficient. It is reported that the GH3 should be able to encode much cleaner video at lower bitrates. Combine that with 50bits and the 1080p60 has more then enough bits to work. Other cameras have very impressive 1080p60 with only 28mbps. An extra 22mbits is huge, especially on a better optimized encoder.

Thomas Smet September 19th, 2012 07:25 PM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Litten (Post 1754320)
Personal views did an interview with Panasonic at Photokina.

Here is a transcript:
questions:dieter-knuettel-questions [Photokina 2012 coverage]

I'm becoming less impressed with this camera all the time.

Didn't really see anything there that were not considered unrealistic rumors. I mean no DSLR has 4:2:2 so that is kind of a realistic outcome there. It is also pretty clear the person/people answering the questions didn't exactly have all the answers. Most of this stuff is right there on the Panasonic webpage and they couldn't answer it. It also seems like they didn't have time to get to know what the new camera actually does.

Typically staff at a trade show only know so much. Lets face it some of us can ask some real curve ball questions at these things. A lot of these questions were fairly deep that even the lead engineer may scratch their head over.

Don Litten September 19th, 2012 08:12 PM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
There was a lot of no comment Thomas.
The one that really hit home was not knowing the Dynamic Range or if the HDMI was clean or not.

Aside from a few improvements, I really don't see where they will be able to justify the price.

I said this a few days ago. I can buy the Black Magic camera for about two times the price and really have the future camera now....

It may be after this is hacked if they haven't encrypted the firmware, and a workaround can be found for some of it's shortcomings, it may be worth me buying. But by that time the price will have come down anyway.

Now that's just my opinion and I'm not nearly arrogant to try to convince others to avoid the GH3. That'a a decision best based on personal need.

Thomas Smet September 19th, 2012 11:32 PM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
I doubt I will upgrade either. In fact I just recently upgraded from my GH1 to the GH2. The GH2 will still continue to be a killer camera and if it already does everything you need then there really is no need to upgrade. I think without a doubt across the board the GH3 is going to be a better camera but that doesn't mean it is a necessity.

Dynamic range may be better but it also may be a bit too early for Panasonic to say by how much. When the Blackmagic camera was announced at NAB there were certain things the staff either couldn't comment on or just didn't know the answer to. The firmware at NAB wasn't ready either and even those who used the camera couldn't really answer certain questions.

You also have to be a bit careful with the BMC in terms of price point. You may have to buy a lot of extra gear just to make it practical such as an external battery system and extra SSD's. Some people have figured about 4k to 5k for a decent kit to get started. Still very cheap for what it is of course. Shooting ProRes is a decent option but shooting raw is going to be a pain to work with. I work with Red footage at work and we use Assimilate Scratch for grading. Killer material and grading software but a very cumbersome workflow and just not practical for every project and budget.

A "no comment" just means they are not allowed to talk about it yet. I honestly think the people there were answering based on the spec sheet and nothing else. Things like the HDMI output quality is not a listed spec and therefore very few people at Panasonic will know the answer to that.

David Heath September 20th, 2012 03:53 AM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomas Smet (Post 1754331)
Those are two totally different things. What is quoted there is the form of HDR mode Panasonic added to the GH3. It is used to create a sort of HDR photography look which is interesting if you like that sort of thing. Dynamic range is totally different.

That they are two different things is exactly the point. HDR means "High Dynamic Range" and is a mode by which two images of different exposures are combined together to form a composite - it can work well, but only for still photographs. But it does have the effect of giving an end result with far higher dynamic range - the longer exposure gives the dtail in the shadows, the shorter the detail in the highlights.

You may understand the difference - but others don't. The point that HDR is a means of getting far greater dynamic range for some STILL photos is being missed. It's being seen that the GH3 has a super high dynamic range mode - and therefore must be applicable to video as well.

Is the video dynamic range better than the GH2? It may be a little - I doubt it's much.
Quote:

Also the 1080p60 I have seen from the GH3 looks more detailed then 720p. It isn't always about resolving detail. 1080p60 has more chroma resolution 960x540 instead of 640x360 and can offer a cleaner video because it doesn't have to be scaled up.
I'll give you the comment about the chroma resolution, you're quite right. As regards scaling, then no DSLR or still sensor will (currently) give true 1080 resolution off the chip. Record 1080 with such a camera and the scaling just happens in camera, not in post.

Switch a camera with 3x 1920x1080 chips from 1080 to 720 and the difference is night and day - do the same with this sort of camera and you'll find the difference far less.......
Quote:

Nothing makes compression artifacts stand out more then scaling them up. If you start at native size you never have to scale it up.
Having said that scaling up happens, it's a true point you raise that in camera scaling doesn't scale up compression artifacts. But a 1080 raster is more difficult to compress than a 720 one.......

Yes, there are likely other improvements in the coder compared to the GH2. Don't think I'm knocking the camera, just trying to get rid of unrealistic expectations.

Bill Bruner September 20th, 2012 01:35 PM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
I have no illusions, the camera will not be perfect and already fails to live up to the initial hype (e.g., XLR accessory, 4:2:2 output from HDMI, etc.) - but I stil think it's worth $1299 and I put one on preorder because of the things I really need such as weathersealing, headphone jack, fully manual audio, and 1080/60p - but also because I'm blown away by Panasonic's decision to provide serious codec alternatives to AVCHD. This is a great decision that they're not getting enough credit for.

Yes, BMCC-like or C300-like DR would have been nice, but what Panasonic really needed was better low light performance than the unhacked GH2 - and Bruce Logan's use of practical lighting in the traffic stop scene from Genesis seems to indicate that the GH3 delivers that.

Cheers,

Bill

Jeff Harper September 20th, 2012 02:54 PM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
Under the hood there are major improvements to this camera, as you point out Bill. I don't care how jaded a person is, one cannot imagine such a price increase would be attempted for this camera were there not plenty of reasons to justify it.

This is a major upgrade, much more significant then the GH1 to GH2. The increase in image quality may or may not be as dramatic, but in the many other improvements, yes, this is big.

There will be the usual crop of folks who initially purchase the camera who will be disappointed that it cannot capture perfect images in unreasonably dark conditions using a slow stock lens, or other similar nonsense, but I suspect this camera will make plenty of people happy.

Thomas Smet September 20th, 2012 03:38 PM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
Upgrades are always just that, upgrades. I still stand by what I said that a lot of expectations of products today are typically unrealistic. I would love a camera to pour me a beer but I know it isn't going to happen.

We see it happen all the time with Apple products and then when people don't get an iPhone with all the hyped features they are disappointed. It really seems like more people want to judge the GH3 for what it doesn't have then for what it does have.

Jeff Harper September 20th, 2012 03:59 PM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
I can't imagine what more anyone could want, Thomas. In my case, an HDMI output that is not cripple as it was on the GH2 would be something I would be thrilled with.

Chip Thome September 21st, 2012 08:09 PM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Harper (Post 1754497)
I can't imagine what more anyone could want,

All I really want to see is the colors I see with my eyes, showing up on the screen. I want those colors to pop, just like the real thing. The GH1 didn't. This GH2 doesn't either. I don't think that by the third version, getting color right is too much to ask for.

William Hohauser September 22nd, 2012 08:27 AM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
Which cameras get the color spectrum correct, for example? And which hues does the GH2 shift?

Chip Thome September 22nd, 2012 10:11 AM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
Hi William.... not sure about other cameras, not looking to switch systems.

But the first glaring example came when I tossed the GH2 out my front door to do some testing. There's a stop sign, relatively new stop sign, 79' away. My eyes see a bright blood red. The footage, that's a nice orangey red color. Tried 6 different modes and got six orangey red stop signs. That's when I really started looking and found my disappointment in these camera lying on these washed out colors. The more I look, the more I see they are "close but no cigar" when compared to the real thing. Maybe no one else sees it. Maybe no one else cares. For me it's something that I find aggravating.

Jeff Harper September 22nd, 2012 12:04 PM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
Chip, which lenses do you shoot with? For example I have shot stunning video using the Olympus 12-60mm F/2.8-4.0 lens, with picture perfect colors that were a joy to behold, and I have shot horrible looking stuff using a Tamron zoom lens that had horrible color rendition for me.

I found for me that the LCD is unreliable, very tricky. For me a lot of guesswork.

Mike Leah September 22nd, 2012 12:25 PM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
I almost always use the LCD for video. The only times I use the viewfinder is when I'm taking photos. For me the LCD always looks different than how the footage comes out so I guess I'm used to it by now.

I think the gh3 will be a nice upgrade. Maybe not a camera I will rush out to get but I'm sure eventually I will. The gh2 that I have still does everything I need quite well.
The gh3 should be a great product either way.

William Hohauser September 22nd, 2012 02:43 PM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
I have long given up on exact colors but then I never really did any work for corporate clients who must have their product a certain color or all hell breaks loose. Way back in my film days there was always color differences in film stocks especially between the warm natural looking Kodak films and the intense blues and reds of Fuji stock. Later on when working with top of the line Ikegami video cameras there would occasionally be a subject who would be wearing a shade of purple that would not come out purple, either blue or red depending on which hue the purple was leaning to. Other purples worked fine. I have worked with other cameras that did the same thing with blue-greens, you would get a green or a blue but not the shade in front of the camera. Then the monitors have their own issues. A truly accurate monitor costs thousands of dollars.

I look to accurate flesh tones first and the rest later. The first question is, does the result look good on it's own?

Don Litten September 22nd, 2012 06:48 PM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
1 Attachment(s)
Chip, I've found the same thing as Jeff. The lens has a tremendous influence on color, especially red. Distance seems to factor in also and I think some of it is that we aren't really seeing some of the reds we think we are.

I've also found the different hacks make a difference. I've been shooting the last few days with a new hack that seems to reproduce the reds very well and eliminate the yellow in foliage.

William is also right and he's also telling his age. I remember those days all too well.

I videoed the Slut Walk this morning and the color of the sign in this grab is about perfect

William Hohauser September 22nd, 2012 08:13 PM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
The what walk?

Chip Thome September 23rd, 2012 12:48 AM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
Jeff and Don..... it was the Panasonic Leica 45mm. So, if anything should have been optimized for the system, I would think that one should have been. BUT, if it's nice out tomorrow, I'll try a few I have here and see if that makes a difference. The video from France linked to earlier in this thread, although done under sodium lights, the saxophone also is completely washed out. The white balance for sodium lights have to be taken into consideration and may be why the sax isn't a nice brassy golden.

William, now that you mention it, I now think remembering having some of those same issues with my GSs when I was shooting those. I wasn't that fussy back then, was more worried about blow out imagery, than getting colors perfect.

When I am on some of the stills forums and seeing some of the images guys are getting, the colors are stunning and just seem to jump out at you. I suppose the difference between a still and video is the amount of information each "image" contains though.

Anyways, that's my bitch du jour and the one thing I really would hope we can see corrected.

Don Litten September 23rd, 2012 01:52 AM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
It's certainly a legitimate gripe Chip.

Getting the most out of the GH2 is work. There are so many variables, I've never found a magic workflow.

Today I shot a group and had a total of 312 clips. Working on each individual clip to get the best color, then trying to grade it all to match takes forever and 3 days.

Then to make it worse, I just watched a comparison video of the 5D III to the Black Magic camera and the BM blew the MK III so far out of the water I hate to look at my finished product.

There is no end to it!

Ron Little September 23rd, 2012 09:14 AM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
Who are you calling a slut?

William Hohauser September 23rd, 2012 09:33 AM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Chip Thome (Post 1754775)
Jeff and Don..... it was the Panasonic Leica 45mm. So, if anything should have been optimized for the system, I would think that one should have been. BUT, if it's nice out tomorrow, I'll try a few I have here and see if that makes a difference. The video from France linked to earlier in this thread, although done under sodium lights, the saxophone also is completely washed out. The white balance for sodium lights have to be taken into consideration and may be why the sax isn't a nice brassy golden.

William, now that you mention it, I now think remembering having some of those same issues with my GSs when I was shooting those. I wasn't that fussy back then, was more worried about blow out imagery, than getting colors perfect.

When I am on some of the stills forums and seeing some of the images guys are getting, the colors are stunning and just seem to jump out at you. I suppose the difference between a still and video is the amount of information each "image" contains though.

Anyways, that's my bitch du jour and the one thing I really would hope we can see corrected.

I am not surprised that the sodium lamp would wash out a golden saxophone since that color is right in the range of the sodium lamp. No contrast.

Still photographers have an arsenal of color correction techniques that video people can only get from high end software. Lately I've been seeing a lot of striking stills that are great to look at but are essentially supernatural in their color rendition

Don Litten September 23rd, 2012 10:23 AM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
3 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ron Little (Post 1754816)
Who are you calling a slut?

I'm still doing the research for a mini doc but the slut name came from a Canadian cop who told a group of women they wouldn't be raped if they didn't dress like sluts.
That kinda PO'ed them I think.
Richmond’s first “Slut Walk” brings up sexual assualt awareness | WTVR.com ? Richmond News & Weather from WTVR Television CBS 6

From one of my clips yesterday:
They all dressed up in interesting outfits and marched 2 miles in protest.

Ron Little September 23rd, 2012 11:50 AM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
Wow, the ignorance of some people is amazing. Anyway, thanks for clearing that up.
Now back to camera talk. I hope this thing has 422 HDMI out. If it does I will really be interested in picking one up.

Don Litten September 23rd, 2012 01:22 PM

Re: GH3: Buzz buzz b-buzz
 
According to Panasonic, it doesn't Ron.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:16 AM.

DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2021 The Digital Video Information Network