Personal View site logo
GH3 user reviews and opinions
  • 1089 Replies sorted by
  • clyde_tclyde_t

    thanks! have you seen noise problems in all-intra footage? because it looks good to me and the low-overhead to decode it makes the workflow easier, so far, from what i've tried.

    i completely agree that 0 sharpening is adding a lot of sharpening. it's seems like a silly place to default, more of a consumer-level setting, the way my TV was out-of-the-box.

    c

  • jimaginejimagine

    We're still testing settings, looking to get the most DR and natural loo out of the camera to match other rigs in post. So far, 50MB .mov, Natural, -4, -4, -2, -5 have been great to pull a solid color correction either in FCPX or Magic Bullet. There's a lot more latitude than a Canon DSLR for instance.

  • jimaginejimagine

    Dialing down NR to -5 will give the most detailed image coming out of the camera. Again, if there's a need for noised reduction it can be done with much better tools in post.

  • jimaginejimagine

    Well, "0" on the GH3 is adding a lot of in-camera sharpening no matter what lens is on the camera. The generally accepted approach is to handle sharpening in post with a better processor and more subtle control. It's how we shoot all our cameras no matter what lens is on them.

  • clyde_tclyde_t

    @jimagine- tried your Natural -4, -4, -2, -5 setting back-to-back with Std -3, -3, -2, 0 i agree it looks very nice. i think i like the -4 sharpness better than the -3. your color is probably giving a better rendition than the standard setting i tried, which is a bit punchier. i'm curious to know more about your choice of -5 NR. what is it doing for you?

  • FilmingArtFilmingArt

    @jimagine

    Remember that lens '20mm Panasonic' is a very sharp lens that communicates with these cameras to natural add sharpening. While those settings make sense for Panasonic lenses it is not the same for other ones.

  • jimaginejimagine

    Remember, keeping sharpening at Zero is like adding 5 steps of sharpening. It's not real resolution, just a lot of in camera edge detail which looks pretty unrealistic and not at all filmic. Our most recent tests with Natural, -4, -4, -2, -5 are grading very well and show very natural colors and skin tones.

  • clyde_tclyde_t

    @christianhubbard- seems pretty viable to me. what problems have there been? it decodes great for me and Avid plays it through AMA just fine.

  • christianhubbardchristianhubbard

    I don't think you need to, we've pretty much ruled out intra as a viable option

  • clyde_tclyde_t

    @Tron- I saw a lot of rolling/ropy edges in some other footage i shot with sharpness at 0. i'll post them but i have to export them from mov first.

    @den15_de yes i will enable download, but i also have the same tests using all-Intra mov and i plan to upload those to google drive or dropbox and share them.

  • TronTron

    Thanks for the comparison Clyde. I run with contrast at -5 and sharpness at 0 most of the time. I keep the sharpness neutral because the image detail seems to soften a little as the contrast is reduced. I'll try dropping the sharpening a little to see how it compares when working with contrasty color grades in post.

  • den15_deden15_de

    clyde_t, please let us to download the original footage on Vimeo, that realy can make possible to analyse the settings!

  • jimaginejimagine

    "@jimagine, man that video looked great!!! It actually made me smile sitting in my den on a gloomy night here in Georgia. I must say that 20mm 1.7 looks crisp as HECK!"

    Yes it is sharp and ridiculously light with the camera. I'm not used to a camera this small and light but we got them to fly around just in these type of circumstances Because I was snowshoeing and handholding with a PVC shoulder mount I actually had to use the little EVF and AFS for those shots.

  • clyde_tclyde_t

    here are some sharpness tests. my conclusion is that sharpness at -3 was optimal in this situation. i looked at a lot of footage on a large LED screen with the display sharpness at 0 and what i see coming out of the GH3 is a too much sharpening at a setting of 0.

    this last one matches what i saw with my eyeballs better. less contrast, less saturation. probably would dial saturation back up a notch.

  • TronTron

    1) BMC 2) 5DIII 3) GH2 4) GH3

  • stoneystoney

    +1. C3 had the most detail but the worst DR. C2 had the worst noise.

  • olegkalyanolegkalyan

    to me cam3 has most amount of fine detail, yet skin is "alive", rest of the cams show somewhat "dead" skin, unless the highlights were killed by taking off highlights in color correction.

    can easily make look cam3 like cam4, not vise versa.. to me is a winner, although cam1 holds highlights better, not shadows,

    Thanks @shian for this test. To me the latest segment shows "it all", no need to show the rest of your efforts, segments, specifically previous to that, why you didn't have 5mk3 in the latest segment, to save it's face? :)

    which profile have you used for GH2?

  • stoneystoney

    Gh3, 5dMk2, Gh2, BMC.

  • ala_imgala_img

    GH3 - 4cam it has wider DR, than 2 and 3 cam (mkIII and gh2), but not so good picture as 1 cam has

  • AriaAria

    @jimagine, man that video looked great!!! It actually made me smile sitting in my den on a gloomy night here in Georgia. I must say that 20mm 1.7 looks crisp as HECK!

  • HillTop1HillTop1

    Wow what a difference watching this on my computer at home makes! But camera 4 clearly looks better, followed by camera 3. Now I can breath at ease lol. Thanks @shian for this test.

  • kholikholi

    @duckpark

    Probably the best post I've read on this site. That's what it's all about, man.

  • jimaginejimagine

    Got to the farm for the holidays and had a chance to work with some settings and slomo. Pretty much ultimate contrast conditions on the fly. 50mbs -4, -4, -2, -5 with gentle CC in FCPX, these settings graded really well.

  • duckparkduckpark

    @kholi, yes, I agree. As I was telling about my backround, I wanted to make a point that it's not just you professionals who can appreciate and pick out a great cinematic picture, it's also us mere hobbyists who see the difference very easily. At least some of us. So my point is this: even though a lot of people can't tell a GH camera and BMCC apart, there will always be people in the audience who can, and there will always be even more people who "just dig" the cinematic picture over the 8 bit one. And for these people you want to give your best. Even if the difference is a small one.

  • AriaAria

    Heck, the only thing i'm truly sure of is that I don't like Cam 2. I could easily live with 1, 3 or 4. I pretty much already knew I liked the look of the BMC and GH2/3 so that's no surprise. The only time I think it would be more obvious which is the BMC is a high dynamic shot that was not under controlled lighting. Otherwise I think you could do pretty well with either a GH2 or GH3.

Add a Comment