Personal View site logo
Make sure to join PV on Telegram or Facebook! Perfect to keep up with community on your smartphone.
Official Low GOP topic, series 4
  • 586 Replies sorted by
  • JDNJDN

    Any more Quantum 100 tests? Wanting to use it on an interview tomorrow but haven't had enough time to test it as thoroughly as I like, though what I see, I really like.

  • CHARPUCHARPU

    Fantastic stuff guys, thanks to much!

    I was wondering if there is any way to reduce the noise in low ISO (160) , Im playing with the latest Quantum, but I just keep getting noise even at 160.

    Is that normal or maybe Im doing something wrong?

  • balazerbalazer

    @lpowell, we're not talking about something going unexpectedly wrong. We are talking about something that was never expected to work, by design.

  • LPowellLPowell

    @balazer - "We are talking about something that was never expected to work."

    Really? Speaking only for myself, that sounds like something I'd be highly interested in hearing about. Anything else you'd prefer we not discuss?

  • balazerbalazer

    ?? Speaking for Driftwood, his 146-Mbps patch settings for 1080p are designed to work in 24p mode and provide the highest possible bit rates. They are not designed to support VMM80% mode, and wouldn't be expected to, given that VMM80% mode uses a bit rate and frame rate 25% higher than 24p mode's.

  • gh2hackedgh2hacked

    First sorry I have little knowledge of these hacks. My question, is it possible to combine the quantum100 24L (50mbs) with the 24H quantumV9b (150mbs) onto one patch? Thanks

  • driftwooddriftwood

    @sohus That's correct mate. For the time being we have to live with the fact that the L setting starts out as the highest frame limit then falls into the more comfortable mode as set by the bitrate. I am looking at a few things now to contain the L setting and getting it to initiate it better.

  • cafeteriacarloscafeteriacarlos

    Quantum100 L setting spans wonderfully on my Sandisk Extreme 32gb Class 10

    Tried the same kind of test on my Lexar Professional 32gb Class 10 and it failed to span. It would fail to span with Aquamotion v2 too so that might be expected. From what I understand, the Lexars write faster than similar Transcend class 10 cards so I wouldn't expect spanning to work with those cards either.

    On the L setting, 4.29gb equaled 5:47 on the very different tests I ran so I would expect to be able to safely take 5-minute shots on cards that don't reliably span.

    Ex-tele works well on both cards.

    @JDN I use Aquamotion V2 on interviews and reliability wise this looks equal or better for me. I would go ahead and use it. I plan to use it Wednesday for an entire day's worth of interviews.

  • sanzadezsanzadez

    @balazer. I think what LPowell was trying to say is that its good for us to report 80% is not working because if it were, then we would know there has been a mistake somewhere. When testing scientifically, you should always test different scenarios, even if you "know" they wont work. Because if they do, then there is something wrong somewhere. I do agree though that if we are running at the highest possible setting for 24p then 80% shouldnt work, but I don't feel it hurts for someone to try it and report back as brodieg did. But enough of that, this isn't a forum for arguing, we should try and keep focus and help driftwood with testing. I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm about to upload Q9b to by GH2 and see how it works with a Transcend class 10.

  • AthirilAthiril

    @sohus

    Seaquake, Quantum's with AQ4 all work great on my Transcend 32gb class 10.. what colour is the sticker on yours? Mine has got the rainbow pattern, came from ebay Taiwan (from the same seller that I got my GH2 from) tested to full capacity (wasn't looking for the cheapest card I could find, but a 32gb class 10 that would get here fast, and that would be express shipping in the same package as the GH2 :))

    @sanzadez

    Haven't tried Q9b, but Q7 with AQ4 runs great on my transcend class 10 on H, doesn't span. But stable for the entire 4GB worth, no matter the scene and dof (haven't tried any death chart, but have not had a single problem on any of them in any high detail complex real world situation with wide dof, a nd Q7 is lower bitrate than Seaquake which worked like that too).

  • KolbasaKolbasa

    Hi Nick, I have tried your Quantum 9b. There is a some flikering, however. Take a look, please. 24H, smooth -1, -2, -2, -1, iso 640, iris 3,5 wide angle, (lens 14-45, stab on). Card is SanDisk 32GB 30MB/s Extreme HD Video. Look at right side of image (where is a guitar). Maybe my test file says something to you (maybe not). Anyway I want to show it to you. File is mts, 756MB. 40sec. Link: http://www.hdvideoproduction.tv/test/iso640_9b.MTS

    Let us know what do you think.

    Thanks!

  • proaudio4proaudio4

    driftwood, I do find blackspot's 720SH vs 720H post above interesting. The macroblocking does appear horrible (look at the detail loss just below the cup) Even if he mixed up which was H verse SH, I was surprised by the large blocks.

  • driftwooddriftwood

    Thanks for the reports. Looking into it. Its all about balancing 60i with 720 on the frame limits which is still killing 720.

  • driftwooddriftwood

    BTW: The big thing left to fully work out is the 'Frame Buffer Size' patches in ptools. If anyone is prepared to alter all up and down by small percentages at a time to see how it effects the settings - just testing those on Quantum - please pm me.

  • driftwooddriftwood

    @Kolbasa Im d/l your file and will report back.

  • proaudio4proaudio4

    Nick, If we can't have both at best quality, which I believe this is the case, my vote goes for the best 720 60P!

    Having said that, you could always throw out a poll, but man we need 60P for slomo!

  • driftwooddriftwood

    A lot of people are using 1080i and prefer it once deinterlaced properly.

    With Q9 I get incredible results/stability with 720p on the voigtlander then shit on the same shutter / iso / fstop etc... settings with a panny 14-140mm. Frustrating. Equally sdcard to card the results vary. Hence my reliance on other people testing and reporting back. We're defo after a good balance.

  • sohussohus

    @driftwood et al Panasonic lenses have a very high resolution and wide angel lenses also cause more problems for the codec. Furthermore, those lenses have IS and AF that burden the processors that also process the image data into AVCHD files. I think the most important things is that these things are documented so we can all make our own decisions. People with manual lenses generally have less problems. I also think the final Quantum should have a 720p and a 1080i branch. Most people never use 1080i while @proaudio4 is right, 720p60 is great for slomo!

  • BuellerBueller

    I was using the Q9 in 720/60P and was good at 50 fps but at any higher FPS it said my card was not fast enough? Though I would get about 7 seconds of pure butter before it stopped. That was using a Canon 50mm 1.8. Don't know if this helps or not.

  • chauncychauncy

    About quantum 9b, 720p 60 with both 95mb 64gb sandisk and 30mb sec sandisk.

    from my tests with 14-140 and 20mm lumix, Af and ois are not factors in the write fails. With them off, they both still fail it just takes a couple of seconds longer. Even with the camera motionless and no focusing or zooming they fail. Always within about 4- 20 seconds.

    I have an ancient 50mm minolta and I can focus and refocus all day with that and it never fails. Same with voight.

    If I was to guess it has to do with the increased communication between a lumix lens and the camera. Even if af and ois are off, there's probably still more info flying back and forth during the card write process.

  • ehrehr

    "I also think the final Quantum should have a 720p and a 1080i branch."

    +1. I need me some fine 60p.

  • JDNJDN

    @ehr, I agree too, but let's let our poor man driftwood perfect the 24h (whilst he's tinkering with 720 / 1080i as he can) and then I'm sure we'll get our branched -- I think @sage has already created a branch with quantum 7 and I'm sure he'll do so with 9 as well -- actually doing some twixtor tests with his patch tuesday so I'll let you know how it goes.

  • RRRRRRRR

    re: lumix lenses and failure - it may well have to do with lens correction being done by the camera rather than AF, OIS and so on.. Lens correction would by far put the bigger load on the processor imo (than AF, OIS) since it's real-time image processing.

  • duartixduartix

    I was about to point that digital lenses might just be sharper and so put more pressure on the codec, but RRRR has made a giant point. The interesting part is that it's putting legacy glass to advantage. :O

    And now I wonder how long before people start asking for an hack to shutdown image correction. :)

  • scaperscaper

    I think you can probably shut down lens correction by going to "SHOOT W/O LENS" and setting this to "ON". Panasonic lenses will still work.

This topic is closed.
← All Discussions