Do we really need the GH4 and 4:2:2, 10 bit, 4K, Raw file? GH1 and GH2 still rock for me

eurocameraman

I am just asking myself a simple question I would like to share with the independent filmmaking community: Do I really need all of this? 4:2:2, 10 bit, 4K, Raw file, ProRes… Do I really need to invest as soon as something new and fancy is coming out?

On my own experience, I would say not so sure as I am very pleased with the result I am getting out of my GH1, GH2 and now GH3. And my GH3’s video is not making a huge difference compare to what I got with the GH1 or GH2. I am still using the hacked GH1 every summer, as a copy is stored in my home country (France) and I love its color rendition compare to GH2/3. FYI, I am living and working in China since 9 years.

Every year I am shooting a short movie or an experiment with the hacked GH1. Some complained about the AVCHD format, but I never got problem in post with it as I am using Premiere CS6 on a powerful enough PC (Dell M6400). I also tested heavy color grading without problem on my GH1 footage, as you can see here on the following videos. Sorry one of the short film doesn’t get English sub yet, but I am posting a link to those video for their visual quality first, so enjoy that part. La Deuche from Hell HD (US sub Version) (there is a longer French version too)

Revolverte HD (F)

In China, I am also using my GH camera beside a Panasonic AF100, which is well known to NOT be the most exciting camera on the market (4:2:0 8 bits, AVCHD at 28MB/s, what a shame!). I had to buy an AF100 as no serious client in my field would accept to pay my usual fee (I was working with a HVX200 + Letus Ultimate prior to the AF+GH) if I were shooting with a GH2 only. After 2 jobs my AF100 got paid back and I can enjoy the use of it with my GH2 and GH3 on project now. ,

AVCHD, 4:2:0, bits… Nevertheless, I shot this Making Of video on huge project with my newly arrived AF100 and GH2 (not hacked yet). Production house, agency and client were delighted by the result. I did everything: shooting, lighting (for interview), sound recording and editing… I am a one man crew shooter (kind of MacGyver sometime) and I prefer to keep things, cheap, simple and light. CrossPolo TVC Making OF HD (US)

To keep the story short, since 2012, I had completed bunch of projects with my M43 equipment without any complain from clients (VW, Audi, French Consulate, TV Channel…) and I might invest in the GH4 if it solves the 3 main problems of the GH3: Viewfinder definition (GH3 is a nightmare compare to GH2 for manual focusing) + real video assistance (Peaking + zebra + waveform) + full time display of histogram and sound recording level while shooting.

4K or higher bit rate are not important to me as my video will NEVER be projected on a big screen and the file of the GH3 are already big enough in term of storage. Quality wise, I really like some of my GH1, GH2 or GH3 shots, and I don’t see much of a difference in term of emotion, and I think this is a more important feature for an independent filmmaker than pixel count or comparing numbers on data sheets…

You can see more of my work here: http://vimeo.com/channels/659428/videos

juantonioconde

Hi, I'm quite a rookie in the world of video. I have a second-hand GH1 with the 14-45 MEGA OIS lens. My intention is to use the camera to record travel videos, in fact I am already using it, but I would like to know which configuration is the most appropriate to then upload the videos to YouTube and what hacks you recommend. I have no interest in timelapse or slow motion. I give more importance to the images being clear with beautiful colors and without unwanted movements. I have some manual lenses, such as Pentacon 50 1.8, Pentancon 29 2.8, HELIOS 44-2 58 f / 2. My specific questions are what hack to use and what camera settings. OIS MODE 1, 2 OR 3, autofocus or manual ... etc ... Thank you very much.

DrDave

The noise on the GH2 is annoying and there's some weird jitter things going on. When I cut the GH2 and the G7 together, side by side, the GH2 still has impressive sharpness, but the G7 just resolves more detail. There's less stairstepping with the G7. The main difference is the clumps in the noise patterns, and I prefer (shocker) the noise on the GH1 to the GH2.

So of course you can still use the GH1, GH2, but the 4K is just easier to work with in terms of color, log if you want it, crop, pan, zoom, etc. Anyone wants my GH2 you can have it cheap :)

Aria

I use my GH1 for head shots and my G7 for wides. It's been working great for me so far.

eurocameraman

@dlzn I do totally agree. Limitation also comes sometime from to the fact to get too much and too many things and people on the way.

For example, filming with a GH camera allows to work alone or with a very limited crew due its form factor: its viewfinder is enough, no need for an extra monitor and extra cables and batteries for it).

Being lighter, more flexible and more discreet means more potential creativity as there is no inertia in decision making. Compactness and camera layout (ergonomy) matters a lot. And the GH series got it right since GH1 until now.

dlzn

I think most of the time 'limitations' is something that is inside your head. There is always a way to create beautiful things.

robstowell

I've just bought a GH4. And it has nothing to do with any feeling the GH1 lacks image quality. I love the pics in my GH1s and will keep using them. The thing that most made me want to change is crashing. I bought both GH1s' pre-hacked' but only to 40Mbs. They crash occasionally - usually wide-shots, usually high contrast, sky, etc. (I think the only time I've crashed one indoors was under theatre lighting.) I'm pretty sure it's not the cards - class 10 cards should handle 40Mbs. That gives me a bit of heebie-jeebies when I'm doing interviews or doco type work, or anything that's critical to get first time. I keep stopping the camera, before I should, afraid I'll lost the whole shot. I plan to keep shooting on the GH1s but I'm really looking forward to the GH4. In camera audio, with headphones and gain control. 96fps could be a lot of fun. Zebras and better peaking and focus options could be life-savers. Better low light performance (no banding!) should be good too. Just have to learn zillion new menu options!~

yskunto

@eurocameraman what PTOOLS setting that you find very reliable for GH1?

IronFilm

Re-reading topics like this is making me feel like perhaps I might just go get myself another GH1!

As I need multiple cameras for covering weddings, so the extra cost of more expensive cameras can quickly add up when you need multiple bodies. So I'm thinking for next wedding season I will use a GH4 together with a handful of GH1 cameras.

http://www.personal-view.com/faqs/ptool/cameras-status-faq

Having long battery life and unlimited recording length is very important to me for weddings, something which sadly very few affordable cameras have. Largely restricted to hacked Panasonic cameras, thus my consideration of getting a bunch of GH1 cameras.

I guess the only other top consideration could be secondhand GX1 cameras? Means a better sensor, and the lack of a flip out screen or EVF (which are both rather important to me) doesn't matter when they're just unmanned supplementary cameras.

eurocameraman

@mrbill thanks for sharing the expience. I am very impatient to shoot my first project with the GH4, will have first to dig into the topics related ot best setting for that cam in different circumstances. 4k is very interesting to me in term of creativity, to do camera movement in post. It might be great for special effects.

mrbill

@Sangye - personally, I find the lo-light difference between the gh2 and the gh4 to be night and day. I got bit so many times by FPN I began to hate that little camera. And working in 1080 after downscaling from 4k is fantastic.

eurocameraman

@Sangye I can completely understand your feeling as I am having GH1, GH2, GH3 and GH4 series. I am working enough with those camera to be able to keep them all and in term of color rendition out of the box, I still prefer the GH1, but the GH2 improved sharpness and controls. I didn't yet shot something with the GH4 but as my film making class just started last Sunday, I am writing a new script I am going to shoot with my students and a multicamera set. Main camera will be the GH4, with GH3/GH2/GH1 beside if needed. Important to achieve a great look is the lens you put on the camera. As I don;t like the clinical look of the original offer in video, I shoot only corporate video with Lumix lenses. As soon as I am shooting a commercial or a short film , I am going for Nikon and Voigtlander manual lenses. During my previous course, I did a music video in a classroom and we had used 5 different cameras: GH2, GH3, Panasonic Af100, Nikon D800 and Leica M240. A great way to test different lenses and sensor size combination. You can see the result here:

Sangye

I sold my GH2 and bought a GH4, and there are times that I regret that decision. All other things being equal, I prefer the image of a GH2 running Moon T7, against a GH4 4K image downscaled to 1080p. The noise pattern is more filmic on the GH2, the highlight roll-off seems smoother, and the ISO performance honestly seems exactly the same if not slightly better on the GH2. Maybe that's just because macro-blocking in the shadows is much reduced on the GH2, but that's my assessment so far.

On the other hand, the GH4 gives better dynamic range, and a huge feature set that makes using it so much easier than the GH2. So at the end of the day, I'm keeping my GH4, and just hoping that Vitaliy or some other hacker will come along and open the way for higher bitrates with better matrices in 4K mode... because that's what is holding the GH4 back, and that's why the hacked GH2 still is the absolute best value in cameras today (I mean hell, I sold mine to some lucky sod for $250).

eurocameraman

@itimjim Better camera, better picture, everybody will agree on this, but the point of the discussion is to say who really needs that much technology, pixel peeping and fancy number to do stories with engaging, dramatic and beautiful shots that people will enjoy to watch on their computer screen, their Smart phone or on their TV set.

We are not speaking about Hollywood production released in Movie Theater here. For example, People who are doing big budget TV commerical HAVE TO rent the best equipment possible on the market, by respect for their client investment who is asking for the best result possible, even at the end, you will not see much of a difference on a TV screen. Please, take few minutes of your time to see what can be achieve with "weak" cameras, for personal work or paid job. (all those videos were shot with GH1 or GH2. If you can, watch the Cross Polo making of completely as at the end you can see the final TV commercial shot with RED. VW representative who was the client told me that their big boss was actually much happier with the making of than with the TVC as they found the car, the actor and the actress more appealing in my shots, whatever the technology behind the shots. We are speaking about emotion and story telling here, not laboratory tests.

ezbzpop

congrats! you'll love it, i am already waiting for GH5 to shoot 60fps@4K

eurocameraman

Here is an updated version with English subtitle of the short film I had shot with my first Lumix GH1 "Green Revolution" Please have a look. Since that film, I am still using my GH1 beside my GH2 and GH3, as I like its color rendition so much. Much better than GH2 and GH3 which are more videolike. GH4 just came in my toolbox, and I will give it a try for a short film this Summer. I moslty looking for the downscaling of 4K into full HD to allow me to create camera movement without using gears. This is the main upgrade from that camera for a 1 man crew. Beside, I like the improvement of the viewfinder compare to the GH3 ( a mess of a viewfinder!) even the color are still wrong and there is no setting available to solve this problem... Whatever camera I am using, I am going to focus more on the story and the way of shooting as I did in this video. GH1 still rock compare to nowadays standard. Have a look:

RRRR

I think you are absolutely right, bot in your analysis and in how you go about things. To me personally I noticed I started to develop some cynicism which is not good for creativity (or the soul). Hence the decisions I described above.

With a bit of distance, commercials is a funny format. :)

eurocameraman

@RRRR I think your totally right on your analysis and one thing I forgot to mention, which is important. In the commercial industry, we don't buy the equipment needed for big budget project, we rent it: camera, lenses, tripod, filters, light,,, everything is extremely expensive. This happens on TVC when client/agency/production agree on a specific type of camera which is a norm in the industry. All person involved in the job avoid to take risk and prefer to pay the price to get what everybody is using at that time. Few years ago, I shot a TVC on a 35mm ARRI camera with Angenieux lenses, in inner Mongolia and Beijing. It was a great working experience, but trully, there is nothing interesting in this commercial. https://vimeo.com/album/2717988/video/57199079 I also worked with a high speed camera for this project shot in Shanghai. This one was more interesting with mix of 35mm, High speed cam and 5D. https://vimeo.com/album/2717988/video/50456682

I did more fancy stuff on my own with my Lumix. Bigger the budget less freedom to create. Therefore, beside my usual professional life, I invested in consummer cameras to get the freedom to shoot whenever I had an idea for a personal project. This reasonnable investment also allowed me to create my filmmaking class as well.

RRRR

Perhaps semantics, but: let's make a difference for what people need and for what people want. And when it comes to cameras and gear - most of it is what people want.

To shoot a film we need a camera (and there are tonnes of options) but we may want some particular look or feel or whatever.. Sometimes the insecurity of someone makes some people think they need something expensive. Sometimes someone wants something particular for a very good reason but most of the time we confuse one over the other, or simply convince ourselves that we NEED when we actually want.

It's not clear cut in any means. For those who work professionally - it's not an easy business in general (but there are far more difficult ones) - choosing badly can hit back and make life more difficult. It's in general better to stick by with a system you know well for a little bit too long than to jump around between gears (that you never get the time to learn let alone master) all the time.

There is no doubt that there's a massive amount of fantastic tools that can deliver high end results for very little money. Therefore I also think that belief in gear is misplaced belief. One has to start with him- or herself and ask the question: What do I want to do?

I did exactly that this spring and so I am cleaning out all surplus equipment. I will keep 1 or 2 cameras at most at a time, and only the lenses I actually like. I stopped doing gigs (shoots) as I found the compromise of resources / quality / pay very difficult to deal with; it sucked all (or too much of) my energy, was difficult to combine with family life and did not give a lot of money back. Now, I only shoot for myself or something I find really interesting; when the circumstances are good enough for me to know I can do a good job; a job I'm happy with. Instead I make most of the money working with post production, which is a lot easier to combine with family life.

eurocameraman

@lmackreath Very interesting post and I think you came out to the right conclusion There is so much to learn and to improve in filmmaking (for whoever is your public) than buying new gears all the time; story telling technique, camera set up, lighting, camera movement and placement, directing, editing.. As soon as your video will be never shown on the big screen, there is nothing to worry about. My first feature film as a DP cameraman was a 40 minutes story shot in year 2000 on a Sony Digibeta (SD format, 720 x480 pixel! only). Leon Dai, the director spent all the budget to transfer that video to 35mm film after editing to be able to participate to Taiwan film festival. I shot on Hi8, DVcam, HDV and finally HD and I am old enough to consider that any tool available today is good enough to express myself and to staisfy my client. The GH1 was already a dream comes true camera (thanks to Vitaliy) and anything coming on the market since then is just adding to the greatness of that HD DSLR area. It is only too bad that camera makers are fighting more on numbers than on real useful feature, such as in camera ND filter and real great (wide and accurate) electornic viewfinder. This is a much more important features than being able to shoot Raw to me. At last, my video are always compressed to be shown on internet, Blue Ray Disk or TV screen... Part 1 of Summers (you can find part2 and 3 on my vimeo page). Best first film in Taiwan international film festival 2000.

eurocameraman

@Brian202020 When you write : "Personally I believe that for PROFESSIONAL USE unless it's a proxy, all footage should be at least 1080, 422, 10bit, and 150 Mbps or higher I-Frame If 1080 or 600 Mbps or higher I-Frame if 4K (UHD)." It is interesting as this post is just taking the opposite approach. Showing final results (professional creation, got paid to do that) without considering those data sheets numbers that many people needs to collect to feel safe to start shooting something significant. Some of my client favorite shots out of my camera were pure 420 AVCHD at 10Mbps, a low value due to shallow depth of field and the nature of the subject (soft skin and darkness wihout much details). See sample here (frame grab from video)

Who cares how big and fancy were the brushes and the exact chemical composition of the material used by famous painters to enjoy their creation? Lets consider feelings from final result, and lets relax on datas needed to deliver PROFESSIONAL works BEFORE doing anything. None of my client are asking me about those things anyway. They don't care. They hire me because they like my way of working and the final result I am able to achieve for them... None of those video are going to appear on movie theater screen, anyway, Highest resolution ever shown will be on Vimeo...

lmackreath

I came from a hacked gh2 to a blackmagic pocket and now have downgraded to a panasonic g6.

The gh2 workflow was easy but the image quality wasn't good enough for me (or so I thought). Then I spent around £2000 on a bmpcc and all The necessary accessories to make it work to get that image quality at the expense of a more complex workflow..

And now I have sold my blackmagic and am buying a g6. I don't get paid for my work... My viewers are friends and family.,, they have never said.."that was great but the compression artifacts really let the piece down" or " I liked it but it could have done with more dynamic range"...,they all love my work because of the story , the editing .,.,, the music.

I have no doubt that dynamic range, resolution, moire.. Rolling shutter etc is important to a lot of indie film makers but let's be honest., the majority of people on here and in most forums are enthusiasts., hobbyists., prosumers.. Whatever you like to call us., in short., people who enjoy it but don't make a living from it.

I have been dabbling in these black arts for twenty years now.,, and it has taken me till now to realise I need to stop stressing about the latest gear and just get out there and shoot. Because of technology these days I have access to these forums day in day out (I am writing this now in bed with my wife asleep next to me) when I should be reading a book., or sleeping .. Or something else apart from worrying about what everyone else is up to...

The choice of excellent quality equipment these days is beyond amazing., more than we as consumers could have ever imagined.., but it will continue to advance every year and we will forever be chasing it and wanting/needing the latest kit.

In my opinion right now the need for 4k video is overstated and ridiculous. We have been so spoilt in the past and now we have just doubled the resolution only to find that 6k at nab next year will now be the standard.

6k resolution videos of cats.., flowers... Holiday videos.....pointless..

I have come full circle now and realise I have been that guy... All the gear and no idea...

I love filming my life and I love my hobby but it should never break the bank and resolution , dr.. Bit rate etc should never takeaway from a good piece with a story , a point., or emotion..

I owned a bmpcc for 6 months .. and in that 6 months 99% of the videos I watched on vimeo shot on it were awful. Be it overexposed.. Incorrect white balance, no camera stabilisation.etc etc, ..worst of all no point or story. I admit Most if not all of my own videos are crap but yet they took me eons to grade and edit because of the workflow. In the right hands( that is a film crew and no one else) the bmpcc would be great.. But not for me.. Or any hobbyist IMHO.

Ok that's me done.,, story story story .. Remember that..we all have very capable video phones now to record things at a moments notice.. It's not all about the grading..the frame crate.. The resolution etc.. It's about a story or capturing a moment..

For anyone who does not do this for a living., stick to a dslr and don't go for raw and things like magic lantern .., your viewers won't notice the difference in quality butt you will do in time in the edit suite and cost in storage...

Good night!

act

I very like my three GH2 for any run and gun situation. Since I regular use external audio recorder last 4 years, syncing process with Pluraleyes is very easy for everyday work. GH2 is best cam to shoot at hard discotheque LED lighting, that we have at weddings. With good lenses I don't need Speedbuster to take natural look at any indoor or lowlight situation. But, at outdoor situation colors out from the camera not ideal and need correction. I found Olympus OMD EM5 close that case very good, so I use OMD for outdoor great colors, and excellent skin tone at daylight. I like add some color grade anyway and output is better than Canon DSLR, I very liked at daylight. I'd like to use GH2 forever, but articulated screen begins destroy it's plastic body and cable connecting. Unfortunately, GH2 has limited lifetime.

darkopera

Well, to my eyes, artificial or not, it seems a lot of more gained detail, compared to other DSLR brands. I obviously was only try to say how much this can get "near" (not matching) some high end results. And i'm not the only one here or there saying this. These are just... "personal views" :-) Then i'm not that expert on the technical side of the camera, so i can't debate on what you say but i rather thank you for giving me such informations. Always glad to learn more. For my little short film i spent an enormous amount of time to correct issues with the footage, plus the post. and by the way i work in the post production, believe me that in the last years i spent my whole time in this industry, between motion graphics, compositing, tracking, color correction etc... So yes, you re right... i would like to have a hybrid camera that gives me a little more of what GH2 provide in terms of DR, possibly with less jello... and i'm good to go. I love to shoot, it's magic for me... and it takes me away from the studio making my life more real than living in front of a computer. This whole raw thing is making even the shooting&reviewing process a pain in the ass. It's not question of 10 minutes more or less. Let's see what will happen with the evolution of the GH4 and new firmwares.

jrd

seriously, with the hack it [GH2] became a special camera that can challenge, in a way, with some top quality results of high end cameras (i.e. crispness/detail)

If by "crispness and detail" you mean artificial sharpening, then you're right. If you mean actual resolution, you're absolutely wrong. Lower resolution isn't necessarily a demerit -- once you get to 700 or 800 lines, actual resolution is greatly over-rated, particularly for couch dramas. But it's just not true to say that the GH2 and the like offers the resolution of high end HD cameras.

As for the rest of this debate, there's no question that you can do far more in post with 12 bit RAW or 10 bit 4:2:2 material than with the 8 bit 4:2:0 coming out of a GH2 -- assuming the sensor has enough dynamic range to take advantage of it. If the power to manipulate the footage in post is of no interest or too much trouble, fine. But it's difficult to understand why some shooters are willing to invest large amounts of time in production and production value, but aren't prepared to spend 10 minutes on a shot in post.

racer5

@Aria

Well I don't find applying a LUT hard or difficult, but it burdens me with choices at the expense of other parts of the process. For example if I shoot a sunset in Log, I will have an endless tweak session to look forward to where I apply various LUTs blindly trying to find the one that best brings out the colors in the sky as I remember them.

If your workflow just means putting Rec709 on your footage before grading, why not just shoot ProRes with the LUT baked in? Drop it on the timeline and start cutting and grading without having to transcode.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

Tags in Topic

Top Posters