@stonebat

Good test, but I have only one body :)

@awaterman
@danyyyel
@mpgxsvcd

Please do not start this Low GOP discussion stuff.
As it can go for ages without any useful result :-)
We already had all this.

It is extraordinary how people want to have the end word. They can't accept that we have choice and people might look at things differently. For example, when someone says that he wants a stable 44mbits file because he feels it is enough for him as he does not want the file to be too big. Should I tell that he is an idiot in doing so because I want the best quality possible even if because of diminishing returns even if I can get a small gain for 2 to 3 times larger file. We have all types of threat and avenue of research here. From the extreme to the stable, from low gop to hdmi etc... what is your problem with that. We are only at the start of it, no one knows where all this will end, so why should we draw conclusion now, because you say so!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Even Vitaliy was not a big supporter of the low gop at the start, I don't know what he thinks now but he did not stop it. The innovation we are seeing now is all for people who had broaden their minds and that are happy to experiment.

@Kae

I really would like to test the requests you have made.

"Has anyone posted a clip with HEAVY motion (in front of camera + moving camera) with new stable 3.62 settings?"

However, I need to understand what you define as "Heavy motion(in front of camera + moving camera)". Are you talking about something like a group of people moving quickly in the distance or a large object moving back and forth in the near field. Also how realistic is shooting @ 24 FPS with heavy motion and a moving camera?

Wouldn't you expect the motion of the video to fail just because the frame rate is too slow? I wouldn't expect RAW 24 FPS footage to look good in the situation you described.

@mpgxsvcd - I find it amazing that you have the time on your hands to question other peoples findings, without offering anything of any substance yourself. I personally use settings submitted by @kae and find the quality exceptional, so therefore have no need to search for this "holy grail" you seem to seek. We are all here willing to test settings to offer comments on these settings to assist others in finding what they want and we do this in our own time for the love of what we do.

There may be no benefit at all to low GOP, although I personally agree with @kae on this one, but the quality of the shots I am taking means I am happy with the settings.

@Kae

I was just trying to understand what you are seeing. Your explanation clears that up. To me it sounds like you have seen a benefit to motion with a low GOP. You have seen clearer and more consistent motion when you have used the shorter GOPs. However, you can’t fully explain why it happens or what the difference is.

You accept that the differences you see are caused solely because of the shorter GOP and increase of I frames without any empirical evidence to back that up. That is fine there are a lot of people out there that accept things based solely on faith.

It looks like you want to share this enlightening experience with everyone else as well. Again that is fine. There are a lot of people out there looking for a quick fix that can be the ultimate savior for their camera. They don’t have the desire to find out how everything works. They want someone else to just tell them the answer without ever considering what the question really is.

You have stated that you don’t want to debate the validity of your findings. Everyone can choose for themselves whether they want to use the lower GOP or not. You are right we are all free to choose what we believe in.

You have a loyal following that appears to like the results they are getting. That is great they have seen the light and now they unquestionably believe they have found the correct path. What I say won’t change that. They are willing to accept your teachings on faith alone. That is something that I don’t choose to do. However, we all have the choice. Some of us just have different criteria that we base those choices on.

Ian_T >"to the motha!!!"

LOL!
That's me bro!

Ian, are you shooting at 88Mb/s or 66Mb/s (or none of this shit)?
I've had no card speed errors (Sandisk Extreme 32GB 30MB/s) with the 20/f1.7 or the 14-140.
I'm using 66Mb/s FB1,FB2,FL at 3X settings with AQ4.

Hmm... It sounds like your Pentax 50mm may have a bit more resolving power that's driving the motha to the limit! Although, I thought the Panny lenses are on the high rez side. It may be interesting for you to frame up a rez chart and check it out.

I was using cosmio's 88mbs settings and had card crashes if I started with movement but if I held the camera still for 3 seconds before moving it would record without problems. What would cause this?

@Jspatz

SanDisk Extreme Pro / HD Video / all operate the same in the GH2... marketed 30Mb/s write speed -> effective 25Mb/sec. The Transcend Class 10 has a marketed write spreed of 20Mb/s -> effectively 19Mb/s. So yes, you should see a difference of 25% in speed.

Well put, Kae. Each to their own.

@Jspatz > What SDHC card is capable of 45Mb/s?

I find it futile and childish to ask someone proof of what they like and don't like. If everybody has choice why should one force the other into his. In french there is a saying like "les gout et les couleurs" Taste and colours cannot be explained, so what, less than 200 hundred years ago all the painters where painting fat woman, go and tell them that their paintings are pieces of shit because nowadays it is more the skinny models than are in vogue.

Well put Kae!