Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

RED Epic verus Panasonic GH2

Status
Not open for further replies.
The GH2 has a crazy amount of imaging capability in a tiny camera. EPIC has 10x as much, plus that gorgeous DR.

Referencing everything I've seen of the GH2 (not this test...), I think its instructive. For those paying attention, it shows what it coming. For those of us not in the EPIC market, the fact that 1080p is currently the distribution format, and we're not concerned about whatever the heck we're shooting being syndicated in 10 years, the options available now and probably coming down the pipe boggle the mind.

As this test shows, compressed 1080p is a great equalizer.
 
Few weeks ago my friend cut my hair. After he was done I looked on the back of my head with a mirror and it seemed that one side had stronger hair than other side, even tiny bit longer. My friend said that the hair is perfectly even and you can see that when you comb it straight. But as my hair is a bit curly in that other side it only looks like it's stronger and a bit longer, even though it really isn't. I said what does it matter if it's perfectly even, if it doesn't look like that when the hair is flowing freely. Everyone will only see the hair to be uneven even though in reality it is even. So we cut the hair to LOOK even.
Click to expand...

What a hairy comparison.....anyway we meet people everyday who say 5D gives the best footage and they even say that it is better than RED MX and EPIC....this is because they own it and want to prove to the world that they have the best product ....yes its a good camera and we have seen best DP's use the camera for certain shots but you cannot make a film with them......anyway you like the camera ....USE IT ...simple...
 
Ryan Farnes said:
As this test shows, compressed 1080p is a great equalizer.
Click to expand...

Tru that. If the final delivery is smashed into the YouTube or Vimeo codec - then it doesn't matter as much where you started from HD camera wise. Would like to see YouTube not suck so much - but then, what do you want for free? Chicken and egg - acquisition vs delivery screen. Why shoot 5K if it's only watched at 720P on Vimeo only? Gotta move the entire industry and consumer to help us along.

This test actually shows the challenge - footage kinda looks the same once passed through online de-quality compression. Overcook a $300 Kobe steak and you have a shit meal. Same goes for film footage. We need to keep pushing to not have our work stepped on by compression.

Maybe RED software wizards can write an Apple Compressor like codec plug-in or stand alone that maximizes quality and is YouTube/Vimeo compliant . . . .
 
Real Epic footage blows away the GH2 footage.

This vimeo test does not show the real footage because it can't.

The GH2 is a very nice camera for the money.
 
Josh Beadle said:
Tru that. If the final delivery is smashed into the YouTube or Vimeo codec - then it doesn't matter as much where you started from HD camera wise. Would like to see YouTube not suck so much - but then, what do you want for free? Chicken and egg - acquisition vs delivery screen. Why shoot 5K if it's only watched at 720P on Vimeo only? Gotta move the entire industry and consumer to help us along.

This test actually shows the challenge - footage kinda looks the same once passed through online de-quality compression. Overcook a $300 Kobe steak and you have a shit meal. Same goes for film footage. We need to keep pushing to not have our work stepped on by compression.

Maybe RED software wizards can write an Apple Compressor like codec plug-in or stand alone that maximizes quality and is YouTube/Vimeo compliant . . . .
Click to expand...

I think that is the point of the test, which a lot of posters here completely missed.

What works for vimeo? do you need an Epic for vimeo, or does a Gh2 work just fine?

Answer: GH2 works just fine.

Many people turned the question into, which camera is scientifically better, what would look better on a big screen, etc., etc. and if you do that, then of course the test is silly and poorly done.

But I really don't think that's the point of this particular test.
 
Martin Stevens said:
Real Epic footage blows away the GH2 footage.

This vimeo test does not show the real footage because it can't.
Click to expand...

I think the idea was to show real vimeo footage. For a HUGE amount of content, it's not going to the big screen or even Blu Ray.

What's exciting about something like Scarlet, is that a lot of projects won't make it past online distribution, but it would be nice to know that if you got the opportunity, it would look great on a big screen.
 
Eric Rodemann said:
I think that is the point of the test, which a lot of posters here completely missed.

What works for vimeo? do you need an Epic for vimeo, or does a Gh2 work just fine?

Answer: GH2 works just fine.

Many people turned the question into, which camera is scientifically better, what would look better on a big screen, etc., etc. and if you do that, then of course the test is silly and poorly done.

But I really don't think that's the point of this particular test.
Click to expand...

That being said - in my still photography I always shoot RAW. From LightRoom I can export a copy of the master RAW file to any format or size I need - be it iPad or 60" fine art print. Beyond just the immediate project needs, the point of shooting at 4K+ RAW is to have that master negative to use in the future. If you're a kid shooting a skate video of your friend then an Epic is not the tool of choice. If you are a commercial artist and are shooting personal reel quality material then shoot better than the project calls for.

There's a proper tool for every job. Always use the very best you can afford since you never know what the future brings concerning delivery screens.
 
Ryan Farnes said:
As this test shows, compressed 1080p is a great equalizer.
Click to expand...

Nope - it shows a poorly conducted test is a great equalizer. Done correctly you'll still see the resolution difference between a GH2 and Epic at 1080p or less.

Graeme
 
Hey Graeme, Just the guy we need! Any chance you guys are working on a YouTube/Vimeo RED compression codec plug-in that maximizes quality and uploads untouched to those services?
 
I'm not working on that - I can't speak for the other guys. As I mentioned above though, the limiting factor here is not the vimeo compression, but the quality of the test procedures...

Graeme
 
Graeme Nattress said:
I'm not working on that - I can't speak for the other guys. As I mentioned above though, the limiting factor here is not the vimeo compression, but the quality of the test procedures...

Graeme
Click to expand...

It seems like compression is compression be it at the point of acquisition (3:1 vs 15:1 RED) or on the upload (720P YouTube/Vimeo). I know using Apple Compressor YouTube codec and pre-compressing my project before uploading to Vimeo produces better results than uploading a QT file and having them compress for me. Seems like a RED compression plug-in would provide a solid link from acquisition through delivery. But then I don't know jackshit about software coding . . .
 
Whether I drive a car or ride a bike, it takes me 3 minutes to get to work. So I conclude that only idiots buy cars if they could buy bikes instead for 1% of the price.
 
András Puiz said:
Whether I drive a car or ride a bike, it takes me 3 minutes to get to work. So I conclude that only idiots buy cars if they could buy bikes instead for 1% of the price.
Click to expand...

Spot on András! Or for longer journeys, who'd buy a Bentley when a Honda Civic will get you there just as quickly?

Graeme
 
Graeme Nattress said:
Incompetent tests produce strange results. We've seen poorly performed and controlled tests from all corners. My advice - do your own tests, and do them well, and shout if you want advice on how to test and what to look for.

For good tests think:

controlled - have you controlled all the variables you can? Are you really measuring resolution, or are you measuring in-camera sharpening or depth-of-field?
repeatability - can you test the same camera over and over and get very similar results? Is the test repeatable over time - can you perform the exact same test next year?
challenge - does the test really stress the camera / codec / lens resolution etc. Is the dynamic range of your scene as wide as you think it is?
variety - does the test encompass a large range, or does it just test a small part of the range (of resolution, or DR, or colours)
objective - is the result of the test an objective number or a subjective impression?

Although charts are boring, they do all of the above well. If you don't shoot the charts, you're not measuring, you're guessing. If you're guessing you're not testing.

Graeme
Click to expand...


BINGO!!

And that is exactly what we did with EPIC vs. ALEXA and also an other camera, not allow to say... in real world applications with a full PROFESSIONAL MOVIE CREW... 4 times now, EPIC has been chosen for all projects... ;)

NOW... As far as this test... I have been seen similar tests for the past, what? 7 years? Before they didn't used to be as many, now they are, comparing a 5D with a Medium Format Hasselblad, etc.

ONLY ONE WORD comes to mind... SILLY!!
 
Sanjin Jukic said:
It's true, I saw some tests with GH2 that has Angenieux 24-290mm T2.8 PL and at 1080p it easy beats in sharpness Alexa, F35, RED1, Epic, all Canon DSLRS, etc.

Even you can shoot anamorphic at 4:3...and more...

The funnies thing is that some people buy expensive camera and think to become cinematographer or even filmmaker right-away...

But probably you've got an idea that any future high-end cine digital camera will get cheaper soon...gap is shrinking very fast...a sort of fly into nowhere could approach some of camera makers soon...

Also we still have to wait for Nov 3rd to see how RED tailored Scarlet with specs and price(s)...
Click to expand...

This is really fun, San...

I am now working with Alexas, while supporting a 2-cam Epic shoot and have been working on an Epic commercial...

It would have been fun to see any of those jobs on a GH2. (And yes, I have shot the GH2 briefly side by side with R1 MX. Sharpness is not the first word that comes to mind. Neither dynamic range or any kind of precission.

It's a fun cam. True enough. But these kind of statements just takes credit from whoever says bullshit like that...
 
I use hacked GHs (big upgrade from stock) and Canon XFs only so I can save my resources for Scarlet. As for those that say these are better than Scarlet, their eyes and aesthetics are probably set so low that they will blow it in post and then there will be no difference.

As soon as Nov 3 was announced I cancelled two shoots because nothing is worse than a film where the quality varies, and my current cams are great but not paradigm shifting, and I see no reason to continue to suffer from images that are painful to my eyes.

BTW at first i thought this thread was a spoof. Reminds me of my audiophile days where speakers and amps with high end distortion did well in short tests because the distortion created "presence" but they were impossible to live with over the long term. Over 100 minutes of film the viewer will know the difference.
 
Last edited:
András Puiz said:
Whether I drive a car or ride a bike, it takes me 3 minutes to get to work. So I conclude that only idiots buy cars if they could buy bikes instead for 1% of the price.
Click to expand...

LOL!

Goodone.

We mounted an Epic on the front of a bobsleigh and sent it out with a 10mm Ultra the other day for a number of times...

The only thing that didn't dismantle, was the Epic...

It is made for work under hard conditions.

And didn't drop a frame...


Workhorse, comes to mind...
 
Eric J said:
The main problem we keep seeing in these current tests is there is NOT enough info about how they blow up in theater. Hell, my wife's iPhone takes great pics until you try and print. I'm sure the GH 2 looks great on a small vimeo streamed link or the back of the lcd, but it's sure as hell no RED. Lets blow these up to full screen, project in theaters, and truly test. IMHO the Zacuto shootout was okay, but really didn't go into to much on how these look blown up. That's where the RED will shine for sure. That's where the 4K and 5K from future manufactures will show. .
Click to expand...
Did you notice the parts on Black Swan that where shot with 7D while you where watching the movie? Or Canon parts in 127 Hours? And I mean in theater. Because I haven't heard of anyone who did.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top