Panasonic GH1

[123ski]

http://panasonic.net/avc/lumix/syste...gh1/movie.html


all I can say is HOLY CRAP

HD 1080p 24fps
HD 720p 60fps

12.1 Megapixel

Complete silent autofocus system while shooting video...only DSLR to be able to do that.

Stereo Sound


other cool features:

Live View Finder system which enables something that simply is not possible with conventional DSLR cameras – the ability to preview the effects of camera settings (e.g., exposure, aperture, shutter speed) before taking the photo.

In addition to the digital camera’s HD video recording capability, the DMC-GH1 features the LUMIX Creative Movie mode which lets the user manually set the shutter speed and aperture, making their videos more creative and representative of their own personal video style preference.

Camera comes out next month apparently, I guess we will have to wait and see how good it really is.

[Hugh Conway]

it's not a SLR - no mirror - which is why it can autofocus in movie mode.

[Tippster]

What were we talking about the other day, Hugh?

BTW guys - this is one of those 4/3 system cameras.

[123ski]

do you guys see that as being a huge problem, because I don't...especially with the capabilities this camera has for such a low price.

[nufenstein]

What were we talking about the other day, Hugh?

BTW guys - this is one of those 4/3 system cameras.

micro 4/3rds....

[123ski]

I personally don't get what the big deal is. If you bring up a 4/3 system camera the first thing people say is "Its not a DSLR". SLR's have been using the same technology for over 60 years, where a mirror reflects the image through the lens and into the viewfinder. Even when SLR's moved to digital they used the same mirror technology. The mirror actually has very little to do with the recording of the picture, either on film or on a memory card because the mirror flips out of the way when the image is actually recorded. The benefit of making an SLR smaller and getting rid of the mirror is not a big deal as long as you get similar image results. Adding benefits of on screen previews of every change you make and the ability to autofocus videos is a huge plus. Stop hating.

[Hugh Conway]

I haven't taken a look through the GH1's viewfinder so I don't know how it's performance is/ is not annoying. The advantage of the mirror is you get a direct optical view of what you get through your lens (why they beat out rangefinders and TLRs), but in a compact package (unlike view cameras). The electric viewfinder introduces a screen/etc which may or may not suck, but you have the advantage of seeing exactly what your sensor is seeing. For a number of techinical reason - AF performance at high frame rates, movie capture, flexiblity in finder placement (no more pentaprism means you can put the finder anywher - so lets do that u4/3 people) etc. the mirror is a distinct handicap

[Tippster]

The electric viewfinder introduces a screen/etc which may or may not suck, but you have the advantage of seeing exactly what your sensor is seeing.

Not quite - you're seeing a low rez facsimile of what your chip is seeing. There are no pixel limitations in optical viewfinders. The main problem with Electronic VF's is resolution and critical focus. (I know you know, Hugh)

For a number of techinical reason - AF performance at high frame rates, movie capture, flexiblity in finder placement (no more pentaprism means you can put the finder anywher - so lets do that u4/3 people) etc. the mirror is a distinct handicap

Which is why no video camera has used an optical viewfinder in 30 years. However the difference between a high rez/high contrast B&W VF and a color standard one is ginormous... unless you're using auto focus and are assuming that it is working.

You cannot get a better focusing mechanism than a split circle screen. You cannot do that electronically. This could be an issue - especially in resolutions higher than HDTV. There's a reason why Film movie cameras still have optical Viewfinders.

[123ski]

you all make some excellent points, both systems have their pros and cons...I cant wait to get my hands on a GH1 though to see how well the digital viewfinder really works

[Hugh Conway]

link
http://www.engadget.com/2009/05/04/p...gets-examined/


looks cool

[Trackhead]

Won't be as good as the 5DM2 in low light, but the variable frame rate is a bonus.

It shoots AVCHD at 17mbps which doesn't hold up as well in post. AVCHD is also more cumbersome to edit, but not a huge hurdle.

The next generation 5DM2 will be the game changer.........

[Tippster]

Won't be as good as the 5DM2 in low light, but the variable frame rate is a bonus.

It also clearly doesn't have the DoF of the full-frame cameras...

It shoots AVCHD at 17mbps which doesn't hold up as well in post. AVCHD is also more cumbersome to edit, but not a huge hurdle.

More of a work flow issue, no? This kind of video camera doesn't seem to be aimed at home video?

The next generation 5DM2 will be the game changer.........

2 channel mini-XLR inputs (balanced) and 16+bit audio would make it a game changer.

[Hugh Conway]

$1499.95 with the 14-140mm lens? Ouch.

[kidwoo]

This kind of video camera doesn't seem to be aimed at home video?

Sure looks like home video.

[Hugh Conway]

Sure looks like home video.

so do most action sports movies

[kidwoo]

so do most action sports movies

That's because the majority of them essentially are.

[123ski]

Sure looks like home video.

only if you are used to shooting with a Scarlet

[Trackhead]

More of a work flow issue, no? This kind of video camera doesn't seem to be aimed at home video?

I don't make any claims at being a wizard in post, but my AVCHD camera footage does not hold up in post nearly as well as the 5D. Same workflow for both, convert to ProRes and go from there.

2 channel mini-XLR inputs (balanced) and 16+bit audio would make it a game changer.

That seems like it would be complicated to squeeze into a small DLSR body.

[Tippster]

The MiniXLRs are about the same size as the flash synch plugs. You could make it a single 4 pin (2 Ch.) and have a converter dongle...

Hey, a boy can dream, can't he?

Regarding the AVCHD I absolutely take you at your word. I thought your main gripe was the time it took to convert the files to ProRes (why not Apple Intermediate Codec?) not necessarily what they looked like once you did. Is the main problem the Color compression?

[kidwoo]

only if you are used to shooting with a Scarlet

Yeah I've been shooting with a scarlet since 2012.

They even make those things yet?


I'm comparing this GH1 footage from panasonic's website to the existing standards of other 'slr-ish' cameras, the D90 and the 5M. Every single clip I've seen from both of those cameras blows away what panasonic has for samples. There's color banding, horrendous auto iris changes and a really flat saturation in the clips I saw. I'm just far from blown away. So no I haven't been shooting with a scarlet, I've been shooting with a readily available prosumer camera that makes that gh1 footage look stoopit.

my AVCHD camera footage does not hold up in post nearly as well as the 5D. Same workflow for both, convert to ProRes and go from there.

Absolutely agree with this. I've got to go through so many transcodes just to get the avchd footage useable, by the time I'm ready to edit, the stuff is pretty degraded.

[Trackhead]

I thought your main gripe was the time it took to convert the files to ProRes (why not Apple Intermediate Codec?) not necessarily what they looked like once you did. Is the main problem the Color compression?

Final Cut converts the AVCHD clips to ProRes fairly quickly, but you still can't use log and transfer efficiently with AVCHD, as it forces you to capture the entire clip. Not a huge deal really, but ProRes chews up hard drive space rather quickly.

I did some shooting recently with the 5D on the ground and a 17mbps AVCHD camera in the air. Comparing the two made me want to puke when I looked at the AVCHD footage. It's ok by itself, but it just looks ugly when side by side with the 5D.