Personal View site logo
GH3 rumors topic
  • 869 Replies sorted by
  • vicharrisvicharris

    Nm

  • CdeCde

    @Soup

    No, I liked it too.

    And I love that the video opens with 'fuck off'.

  • RRRRRRRR

    The only thing that really annoys me about the music is that I can´t remember who it is... I know, but can´t remember the name. Aargh!

    Strike that: I solved it!

    Im pretty certain it´s imogen heap:

  • svartsvart

    @Kholi Having high DR is fine, but the way people plug on about how they aren't going to buy the GH3 unless it has XX stops of DR isn't constructive. What ever happened to buying something because it just looked good? I think too many people confuse technical specs with actual quality. While one can be used to describe the other, they are still two different things. And ARRI was definitely going for a film replacement with Alexa and DR is definitely part of that, but the roll-offs are much more important. As Lpowell mentions, the roll-offs are logarithmic in film and the eye and in CMOS they are linear. That's why you can technically have 12 stops of DR in both digital and film and it'd still look like digital and film, because the roll-off in one is linear and the other is log.

  • danyyyeldanyyyel

    @svart For me DR was always the missing link. That is why I did a test on the gh2 vs 7d DR below.

    http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/1795/dynamic-range-test-between-gh2-and-7d/p2

    For me everything has to reach a certain threshold. True 1080p for resolution, very good 800 Iso to good 1600 iso for low light and at least 12 stop of DR. Unfortunately until now, you see people just focusing on resolution and low light. If a camera is not 4k or is not noise less above 1600 iso they go mental. What I am happy now is that general Joe is seeing the importance of DR (thus putting pressure on manufacturers). Perhaps because it was the last missing link after resolution, lSO, sensor size to achieve the film look. For me (photographer) DR is like matter, the more you have it (untill a certain level), the more your files have that richness (difficult for my English to explain).

    Now everything has a threshold, once you reach it, it is just marginal gain. When the day we reach about 14 stop I think it will be a threshold (12 is still very good). Using a d800, I would call it near human vision and over and above it would start to get cumbersome because the image will absolutely need a lot of grading.

  • kholikholi

    @RRRR

    It's not her, just someone inspired by her. =P

  • RRRRRRRR

    @kholi are you sure? I mean, how much would you bet on it?

  • AstroAstro

    @kholi No I am pretty certain that thats definitely Imogen Heap, no one else has those eyebrows and jawline....plus the video is in her channel on youtube, and thats her.

    @danyyyel Did you download the video in 720P from youtube?... You can with Netvideohunter in Firefox, anyway the quality is not great, but I did not see any blown out highlights in the clouds on the opening canyon shots that you mentioned a page ago. Maybe I am missing something, but I am used to treating/avoiding the blown out highlights in the GH2...and I did not see them in that canyon shot even tho the 720p version was pretty crappy overall in terms of compression.

  • RRRRRRRR

    @Astro

    Hehehe :)

    re: the canyon, what I think danyyyel was referrring to was the still where highlights were intentionally let go; the shot was exposed pretty brightly. IN my opinion that shot showed some promising highlight roll-off... But I won´t analyze this any more now. Time to let it go and wait.

  • kholikholi

    @RRRR

    I meant in the Panasonic Video...

  • AriaAria

    At this price range i'll accept any increase in DR that they can give. The GH3 looks like it's already going to give us so much more as a device that i'm not going to be too harsh on them if they don't give us a perfect camera. We're getting so greedy now when it comes to cameras and really after a slow start all of a sudden the cameras are coming fast and heavy with new improvements. Seems like Nikon, Sony and Pany are all in on this market.

  • danyyyeldanyyyel

    @Astro At 14 second when it writes lumix gh3 debut in big. Now I cannot judge a camera from some crappy youtube video, but I was just pointing it out.

  • inqb8trinqb8tr

    72mbps is nice, but can it do 172? If it could I'd buy it.

  • AstroAstro

    @danyyyel

    Yep...You are right....I see it, even on the 720p downloaded vid. I cycled it 13 to 15 sec and looked closely, its possible that the sun was in that area under the letters LU maybe...there is a slight blowout under the letter T too, but the rest of the clouds are fairly mellow, interesting.....it indicates a lot of light in those bright areas. (sun?)

    The thing I dont understand is if this is a promo video, why is it soo crappy, I mean I have seen loads of 720p vids that are better than this on youtube, its like they compressed the ass out of it first, then uploaded and youtube compressed it even more. Its weird that a promo video would be this bad, probably the original shots are great but the end result is mangled...much more so than it need be, even on youtube.

  • RafaRafa

    @LPowell Great exposition on the problems of using flat profiles when you have just an 8b code. From 10b up makes sense, but with 8b in fact you are losing DR.

  • AriaAria

    It's really premature to assume that 72mbps won't be enough. For one thing I think that the key will be how well the processing does it's job. I'm often reminded of how good the image from Sony FS100 looks despite not really having a very high bit rate. There's more to it than raw bit rate.

  • vicxvicx
    it degrades the precision of the encoded color data, particularly in near-black shadow details.

    And that quantisation starts in RAW even before the encoder gets hold of it but the encoder really does play favourites with the data and low luma loses out big time.

    I am doing some examination of frame grabs in Avisynth using the histogram("luma") function to show how much high luma detail is being favoured over low luma detail by different patches. One thing I am noticing straight away is how much the GH2 AVCHD encoder puts all the data into highlights and abandons low luminance sections of the image. I think this makes sense when you have bitrates around ~20mbps because perceptually you will notice low luma areas less but now that we have the hacks and very high bitrates it is very annoying to see the encoder still throwing so much data into highlight detail that you can't even resolve while still starving out low luma regions.

    @Rafa I think the choices Panansonic engineers made in the GH2 AVCHD encoder targeting high compression techniques to achieve nice looking low bitrate modes actually probably gutted its potential for higher IQ at high bitrates(with difficult material). I don't think it is a 8bit/10bit thing at all. Bluray movies look pretty damn good and they are 8bit 4:2:0. You don't need 10bit to achieve high IQ you just need a good encoder. I do blame the encoder because 170mbps of h264 should produce an immaculate picture everytime and it would if the patch makers had more access to the encoding engine.

    Hopefully the encoder in the GH3 has been radically upgraded and we can haz access.

    Time will tell.

  • thepalaliasthepalalias

    In terms of All-I bitrate in 7x mbps range, let us not forget that SMBU v1 did some very cool things with that, and they compare very, very favorably to the All-I mode on the 5DMarkIII.

    And then let us think about how effective the stock 24H was on the GH2 vs 40-50 mbps hacked settings on the GH1.

    Will the All-I mode be as good as we like? It remains to seen, but there is every reason to set the bar high based on what has already been done.

    So I think the codec quality will meet or exceed SMBU v1, and if it does not, I will be disappointed and will voice that.

    Now I get to wait and see what reality turns out like: fun or disappointing. :)

  • mpgxsvcdmpgxsvcd

    @vicharris

    There is a huge difference between shooting a commercial with a different camera than what you are advertising and showing stills that you imply have come from one camera but they are actually from another camera. One is just marketing. The other is fraud.

  • tommytommy

    I am definitelty excited about the GH3 as well. I do think it is interesting that (almost) no one is talking about sound (in- / outputs / preamps). I have a GH2 but the audio workflow is still the biggest problem for me as a documentary filmmaker.I bought a Tascam, but I returned it, as it is just too much for 1 guy. In a week or so I will test the new AG-AC90. (1080 50P) Let's see how the tiny AC90 sensor does compared to the GH2. If it is much worse, I am afraid I need to buy the GH3 as well....

  • MinorHDMinorHD

    I love the song in the promo video and it sets the mood beautifully. What the heck, none of you like Imogen Heap or Bon Iver? Btw, that was definetely not Heap singing.

  • johnnymjohnnym

    pre-review by Philip Bloom : http://philipbloom.net/2012/09/15/genesis/

  • zigizigizigizigi

    I think so far Pana's advertising campaign is a fail when in comes down to artistic audience, people arguing about bokeh and other mystical aspects of the picture. Instead of going classic, shooting picturesque views, sexy bitchez and flamboyant colors they did very weird promo clip and now this. Gloomy purplish-brown ala suspense short reminded me of some student work. Not bad, produced without major flaws but nothing to write home about. Zacuto audience is lost.

    I'm not an artist, I'm rather a logical person, so I'll wait for some technical, strictly scientific, no bullshit tests.

  • tinyrobottinyrobot

    Not sure what all the praise is for "Genesis." Story was blah... Images, unless they were shooting in higher ISO territory, could've been easily shot with a hacked GH2.

    Maybe the "G" needs to be hacked.

  • magnificomagnifico

    berniez said a few days ago : "...OK, more detail. The video signal is linear and digital. Every time we add a bit we double the number of levels available. 8 bits is 256 levels. Of course luminance is made up of red+green+blue. So the best possible outcome with 8 bits is 256 levels of R + 256 levels of blue (Giving one extra doubling ie: 9 stops) + 256 levels of green which is an extra 1/2 stop. So the best possible outcome with 8 bits is 9.5 stops ..."

    I think there is something misunderstood here,

    1/ first, luminance in the video signal is not 3 x 256 level. It is 256 bits only,

    2/ Dynamic Range is the way light is registered and shows when photosites (and D/A conversion) are loosing their mind not being able to make difference between 1 signal and another signal with twice the light,

    3/ The best possible outcome in a 8 bits signal (luminance) depends of the gamma function. See what LPowell and danyyyel said in this page.

    For instance : 256*(0,5)^DR=1 gives DR=8, that means for a flat gamma of course the best DR is 8 levels.

    256*(0,7)^DR=1 gives DR=15,5 inside a 8bits signal...

This topic is closed.
← All Discussions