I shoot always underexposed, except in daylight cause I don't have nd filter, but I feel that using in-camera contrast changes all the time skintones and generally the way that colors act cause in every different exposure the point that the camera starts pushing mids to black also changes. The camera will select as "black area" a different area in exposure -2 than +2. I am not sure but I still hate in-camera contrast :P

@deang001 You said it brother. That would be some fantastic meta data to have with each shot.

Found something today and I think it is very interesting. When underexposing by 2/3 of a stop (in sufficient light), skin tones seems less chalky when recovered in post and shadows fall off more natural. Overall better video quality.

I'll be posting clips later this week.

i have huge complex avoiding the incamera settings that I destroy everything trying not to use them with the hope of a flat image. Conclusion: In very low light forget flat settings. Denoiser, sharpness, saturation and HIGH iso must be used to boost image before compression. As I discovered it is better in extremely low light conditions to go at even 6400 -5 +5 +2 +5 and press down mids in post than trying to shoot a flat image and boost in post everything. I hope for a hack that at least let us shoot in 25 and 30p and use all the color information for those few frames, not like now, the issue with same image quality in both 25 and 50 (30-60) is like the camera tells me that it just records and then deletes half frames

@starios That's a good question my friend. The wedding I recently shot got me thinking the same thing. I shot most of the footage at 60fps so I could get beautiful slow motion in post by slowing the footage to 50% speed. The 60fps and the 24fps raw footage is.... well.... identical in quality. I'm sure there's some math to explain this right or wrong but it boils down to this... My eyes (I am a pixel peeper) would swear on the life of my GH3 that there's 0% noticeable difference. Maybe I'm and idiot and I'll learn that in the future but for now ignorance is bliss? lol X^D

natural, -5, -5, -2, -5, 25p, iso1600, ss25, f1.7, a touch contrast-saturation in post, neatvideo. 20mm pancake probably needs coated filter, it is not ca round the light, the lens is spherical.

Ok, Natural -2, -5, 0, -5, 50p MOV

@maddog15 no, first time I tried after following this post http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/8113/speedbooster-gh2-with-cc30m-sensor-mod-fishing-trip-/p1 and pchristoph method. Not sure whether dialing the correction in camera is the same as using the real filter (would like to try the filter as well). Have a look here http://www.fourseasonshd.com/cgi-bin/csvsearch.pl?db=db1&tp=tp4&search=bluelight01. Also GH2 and GH3 are different beasts, but it looks to me that it does good for skin tones, and in general to remove that color cast that results in dull colors. But it could be due to the Nikon lenses. There are so many variables, aargh! I went to -2 contrast instead of -5 because it looked too bad for skin tones. Also I'm experimenting with Vibrant, which some say is the mode which introduces less in-camera correction in the end (!). What do you mean exactly with "profile and sub-settings"? If you mean AVCHD or MOV, I tend to use MOV if possible, but avoid it for low light since it looks so harsh and terrible. Also I suspect it gives more strobing/jittering motion problems.

@matt_gh2. Thank you. Unfortunately this was family...yikes. Sometimes worse than clients.... They know where you live and you have to see them on the holidays at least. X^D

The 28Mbps 60/50fps seems much better than the 20Mbps 30/25 mode? I shoot one for funeral (used only on one scene) and the quality is definitely as as good as the one shown here or the 50Mbps .Mov

Just got GH3 and am using a kit 14-140mm lens and shooting in blazing sun here in Colorado. Can't say I can see much difference compared to my Gh2 (Cluster X moon T7) rig. A little disappointed and wondering if I made a mistake. Highlights appear to be blown out more and footage is not as sharp. I do think the skin tones are better though and audio monitoring is fantastic but seeing as we don't have an XLR input still cripples. Overall I'm not as excited as I expected to be think perhaps C100 is the only way to go for serious doc work. Then I realize I don't have the lolly to buy one and folks make perfectly good docs with 7Ds and the like! Guess we are spoilt with the picture of the hacked GH2! I did have all the settings turned down and was using the 70Mbps intra 24p codec. Perhaps I'll try some of the settings talked about in this thread as well as the 50Mbps codec. Also I swear the ELF is worse than the GH2, the screen has a big green shift when not viewed straight on and I don't see a good way to focus, christ even my tm700 has focus peaking. GH3 for sale, anyone!

@flablo that's really nice colours look great.