@driftwood 2x for 16c

@johnnym
My bet is on the 2nd picture

2nd, in the way youve named them!!!! Go on tell us then! Don't you think the new MJPEG settings are any good then?! There's more to come :-)

LOL

@Driftwood

I needd a 2, 35 without having to use special lenses anamorphic.

Driftwood thank you

I have 1.33x, 1.5x and 2x also. 2x is too wide though, so I'd be interested in the above suggestion, although I highly doubt it will be possible.

Hey guy's here is a new video that I just uploaded on youtube using @driftwood latest patch Quantum v2..
Lens Pany 20mm f1.7 Iso 320-1250
Profile Cinema (-2-1-0-2)
No color corrections
Custom W.B (3400K) to neutralize between halogen & fluorescent softbox lighting..

@WhiteRabbit, thanks for that report. Was the VGA mode what you would call superior to AVCHD for anamorphics? Or MJPEG?

I've always thought MJPEG looked harsh/nasty/digital versus AVCHD, but I'll have to give it another shot. Of course 30fps still pretty much kills it for me, but for certain things I might be okay with conforming to 24.

@Oedipax, after looking at my skin tones test footage, and comparing head and shoulder shot footage using three different Quantum Beta 3 settings, namely:
1. MJPEG 2160x810 VGA with Isco anamorphic attached to taking lens;
2. AVCHD 1080p24 24H with Isco anamorphic attached to taking lens; and
3. AVCHD 1080p24 24H with Lomo 75mm lens attached,
I found that number 3, Lomo 75mm, was clearly the sharpest, most detailed, and smoothest looking footage. As for the anamorphic setups. both 1 and 2 were softer than 3 when comparing, of course, as the Isco is chaining more glass on existing glass. Then 2 being sharper than 1. For the close up shot, MJPEG was perhaps slightly sharper, yet harsher, as you clearly observed and pointed out. Earlier today, I shot some wider shots, focus on infinity, and the detail in more distant shots make the MJPEG anamorphic footage appear sharper and detailed, as opposed to AVCHD which is smoother and less detailed looking footage. These are my objective views after installing Quantum Beta 3 today, and only using the GH2 for a week or so, and only two days with minor testing of the anamorphic attachment. I would like to shoot some more experimental footage over the coming days and make further observations instead of uploading any of my poor quality 'out the window' footage I recorded earlier today. As for my skin tones footage, I am submitting that now to @driftwood. Perhap Mr D can share some observations from my skin tones footage, or the matter in general, in due course. Many people to thank on this forum. Thank you.

I hope anyone proves me wrong saying the VGA mode is lacking resolution.

@spacewig,
Since you're new, you may want to read up on this topic.
The reason you're not seeing as much noise with the stock firmware is due to it's being smeared by macroblocks due to more aggressive compression.

There's nothing magic going on here. It's not like Vitaliy added code to produce noise ;)
The bottom line is the hack now allows us to capture more of what the sensor is really seeing.
Also, you are now able to make a better model of noise and remove in post opposed to murky smeared swarming compression artifacts.

Also, driftwood always improves his 24H, so if you're after the latest and greatest, "currently" it's Quantum V3.

@spacewig, Neat Video is the current favorite for noise reduction. It's great!

@oedipax I'll have to try it out, thanks. I've heard about it on a numbr of occasions.

@driftwood Great to know, thanks. I'll definitely read up on that.