Superproducer Ted Hope on...

September 15, 2012

Watch the First Film Shot on the Panasonic GH3

While it's not set to be announced until Monday, a promotional video for the new Panasonic GH3 was accidentally released yesterday. The video has been taken down numerous times but thanks to various YouTube users it has been uploaded again each time. In that video there were a few shots of Philip Bloom and Bruce Logan, ASC (who was in charge of the recent Zacuto Shootout) making a film with the new camera. That film, Genesis, was written and directed by Bruce Logan and DP'ed by both Logan and Philip Bloom, and you can watch it below to get a brief glimpse of what this new Panasonic camera is capable of.

Here's a little from Philip about what they used for lenses on the project:

Lens wise we used all micro 4/3 or 4/3 glass…A lot on the great Voigtlander 25mm F0.95, used on almost all the low light stuff as well as the SLR Magic 12mm F1.4. The Olympus 14-35 F2 was out workhouse. Used this A LOT. Also the 35-100 F2. Great glass. Not ideal for movie shooting though with the loss of focus when zooming in and fiddly focus. Lots of lumix glass was used to especially the brand new lenses coming out soon!

For some reason I like what this looks like more than anything I've seen from the GH2 so far. I can't quite put my finger on it yet, but according to Bloom the file will be available to download at some point after the announcement on Monday. Rolling shutter is still there, of course. For those who are looking for that to be fixed in any future cameras, I wouldn't hold your breath. The C300 does a very good job, but it's very expensive to fix, and even cameras costing $40K and $50K still have it! The two easiest ways to combat it right now are a mechanical shutter or a global shutter. Global shutters greatly affect noise and dynamic range, so until their development improves, we'll be dealing with that for the foreseeable future. Personally I'd rather have excellent dynamic range than no rolling shutter.

I'm sure this went through a decent color grade, but I think it's a great display of what the new camera can do. It's hard to say how much dynamic range has been improved, especially without a side-by-side comparison. The GH2 was one of the cameras that needed a ton of fill light in the Zacuto Shootout to deal with the limited dynamic range, so it would have been interesting to see how much better this new camera would have fared. Either way we'll be finding out more on Monday when the camera is announced.

Would any of you still purchase this camera even if it costs around $2,000? Are the new features enough of an improvement? What about those who have never liked the image from the GH2 -- does this short change your mind?

Link: New short film “Genesis” shot on pre-production new “G” camera from Panasonic…more on Monday! -- Philip Bloom

Your Comment

79 Comments

I'm allergic to the Panasonic look and this represents little progress for me. The teeny fiddly lenses are a dead end investment.

DSLR video had a good run but has come to a close I'm afraid. What it did was raise our quality/price expectations and gave us pro cameras within reach such as the FS700 and C100. Kids will still cut their teeth on things like this and there will always be a fringe of hacker type devotees, but the lenses and rigging needed aren't any cheaper than ones with a future, and something like the RX100 wins on size and cost. For dual-use with stills, people will want full frame and are getting it affordably with products like the D600 and likely 6D, or at quality with the 1DX.

Pass.

September 15, 2012

0
Reply
Peter

Shane Hurlbut seems to be gearing up to shoot a Deamworks feature film with multiple DSLRs shooting 4K (Canon 1DC) so maybe not yet the end of The DSLR Run?

September 15, 2012

1
Reply
Rob

I got a kick out of this. Especially when thinking of Peter responding to everything in his daily life in this manner: "This breakfast sandwich is pedestrian, while it may be fine for poor slobs who have to eat on the go, it is beneath me. Pass."

I could see the dismissive hand gesture he was making as I was reading.

September 15, 2012

0
Reply
Herb

Our standards in low-budge land have to be guided by a far harsher and more dismissive audience: the YouTube commentariat. Will they press the Like button, or even better, the Share button? Or will they backswipe with their hand and pass.

Having the highest standards in this business generally heads you up the scale. Thankfully, (and in large part to the 5D2 and its offspring) we don't have to go broke anymore getting on that train. There are exciting developments every week, Sony just released a vista-vision camcorder with a truly universal lensmount and all the ergonomics save ND's for $3000. Uhm...DSLRs? Very 2011.

And yes the last place I skimp is on what goes in my belly. Good taste a plus in this biz?

September 15, 2012

0
Reply
Peter

That's an interesting response to your critics. Shooting video for the 'Tube mob is extremely low standards, perhaps the lowest of lowest of low. Unbelievable that so many well-intended but misguided people want to target a gansta audience. Numbers? Yeah, throw a party and have 11,666 homies show up or a dozen decent denizens attend. Your choice.

September 15, 2012

0
Reply
antelope_264

I far prefer vimeo to Youtube of course, but client work lives and dies on Youtube at this budget. For more exclusive venues such as festivals, theatres, netflix/hulu etc. you have no business shooting with DSLRs either. Sure people do it but really is that by choice? Or of any sense? Cameras under $5,000 are Youtube machines whether we like it or not. And standing out amidst a lot of crap is what can help get you out of that cesspool.

September 15, 2012

0
Reply
Peter

LOL! Sooooooo..... You mean to tell me if a director loves the look of a dslr and has a huge budget to shoot a film with it, he can't/shouldn't enter that film in a festival or have it distributed and played in theatres at all because he felt he could best express his idea using a DSLR? That's like saying "you shouldn't drink water unless it's bottled" or "you shouldn't drive unless you drive a BMW 745" or "you shouldn't jog unless you have NIKE cross training shoes" or "you shouldn't bowl unless you have your own bowling ball" If so, you restrict artistic expression by confining it within the barriers of technology. Doesn't really make sense. When I first move to this city I slept on an air mattress because I didn't have a bed. I guess I shouldn't have went to sleep.

September 15, 2012

0
Reply

Dear "Prowla," I suggest going back home with your GH2 & GH3 and toy lenses and making the most of the talent you can find there. The talent in (I'm assuming you moved to) LA is already well enough served with technology well ahead of that. Anyone reduced to having to shoot with such equipment came to LA far too early in their development.

September 16, 2012

0
Reply
Peter

Wow Peter.... wow....
You know this little film called "Like Crazy" was shot on a DSLR... won this little thing called the Grand Jury Prize at Sundance. It's just a tool. I just loooveeee all the shit talking on these forums. It's so easy to come off as a bad ass behind a computer. For all the people talking all high and mighty, I think we should play a game called "post your work." I bet it would shut some people up real quick, because I'll bet you anyone who's good at what they do only come to these forums for information and not to try and have a pissing contest with everyone.

September 16, 2012

0
Reply
Marko

Hi Marko,

As they are discussing downthread, anyone whose work gets posted on these forums full of anonymous hacks gets their name dragged through the mud..."Awful script and cinematography!" I would be very happy participating in a forum where everyone had to post under their real name with a link to their vimeo feed etc. so any potshots they took could be returned. That would be a great idea and I will sign up for it.

For me the anonymity lets me be more honest rather than less though...I really try to be helpful even if it is tough love. Earlier this year shooting films on tourist cameras some considered legit, but the tech is developing too fast to rest on that. People who are stuck on that system, fine, make the best work you can and get out of it. People looking to invest ought to do so in gear that has a future. People looking for a specific "look" might be interested in something like the Digital Bolex, but that would likely be a one-off project and not your A cam so rent accordingly.

Such logic will anger people who have made the investment in tourist gear thinking it would help them develop professional credentials, and some of those will make personal attacks. Because I and they are anonymous, they can go ahead, it's all fair I suppose. But the logic stands.

September 16, 2012

0
Reply
Peter

LOL! Ok I get it now. Peter is simply stirring up words in order to get a reaction from people lol. He's not really that close minded. It's all a sham. Nice one Peter! You're a great jokester haha!

September 16, 2012

0
Reply

Well, last summer we shot a low-budget feature on unhacked GH2, and it is quite successful. It was finished this summer and immediately won all the festivals (3, as far as I know) it was sent to.

That was made with a "YouTube camera", you say?

September 17, 2012

0
Reply
Andrey

Agree. I only lasted 30 sec in. There's a reason very few features have been made with hacked/non-hacked Panny DSLRs. I tried the GH2. Hated it. This only looks slightly better.

September 16, 2012

1
Reply
marklondon

My thought is technology is still changing to fast to make predictions about how anything is going to be I believe its a little early to say DSLR'S are on the way out but one prediction I will make is pro video cameras will move to smaller form factors because of the flexibility of needing less room to work with which I'm sure isn't a revelation to anyone. economics dictate that I use a dslr for now but I dream of the day I can afford a pro cam because nothing beats having the control you get from one.

September 20, 2012

0
Reply
Gary Simmons

oops forgot to say I thought the video was very promising they did a good job especially considering the tools they used.

September 20, 2012

0
Reply
Gary Simmons

Crikey that's a bit harsh - the story is a bit cringe making but the images look pretty smashing for a little camera don't you think?

September 15, 2012

0
Reply
marcus

I agree that the GH3 short looks very good. The image looks clean and reasonably free of artifacts. For comparison I went and watched the D600 short referenced above, and I don't think looks as good as Bloom's GH3 short or as good as the D800 Joy Ride short.

September 15, 2012

0
Reply
Markus

I'm hoping for a better encode 91080p) of the GH3 short next week - looks promising though. There is a 1080p downloadble version of the Nikon D600 demo here: https://vimeo.com/49436646 that looks amazing to me.

Remember GENSIS had a FULL crew with big budget, CHASING THE LIGHT was made by just 2 guys, albeit pro photographers.

Great week for DSLR world - which is not even close to being dead in my opinion...

September 15, 2012

0
Reply
Lance B

Chasing the Light was made over 4 weeks so even though it was just 2 brothers they
had a much better chance to capture great imagery.
Genesis was shot in probably 3 days with a full crew. But they couldn't wait for good light.
They just had to shoot nonstop BECAUSE they had a full crew.

September 16, 2012

0
Reply
sammy

This looks really nice, and was not a terrible film either. Can't say much about detail/resolution until a higher res version is out, but the DR and ALL-I codec seem to be capable of quite a filmic look. The simplest thing I can say is it just doesn't scream "shot on a dslr!" I'm definitely looking forward to get my hands on one of these!

September 15, 2012

0
Reply
JR

This takes us back, though, to the complaint that ALL-I implementation on the 5D Mark III could sometimes be inferior to the interframe codec that's supposedly worse (and at a lower bitrate).

FYI, as the GH3 launches, here's its User Group for a more product specific focus to complement these posts:

http://vimeo.com/groups/GH3users
http://facebook.com/GH3users
http://twitter.com/GH3users

September 16, 2012

0
Reply

"For some reason I like what this looks like more than anything I’ve seen from the GH2 so far. I can’t quite put my finger on it yet"

Colour, skintones look fantastic, GH2 they rarely impressed.

September 15, 2012

-1
Reply
Jimmy

It might be color yes, but it could also be the dynamic range. I have an idea, I just mean I wasn't sure which part made me like the image more. :)

September 15, 2012

0
Reply
avatar
Joe Marine
Editor-at-Large
Shooter/Writer/Director

Apparently its a sony sensor, re-watching the 1080 version colour/DR/gradiation have all improved in favour of small sacrifice in sharpness, banding looks a tad better but not much.

September 15, 2012

0
Reply
Jimmy

It's certainly possible, but I doubt very much Sony was involved in the sensor design. Panasonic is definitely capable and they've been doing it for a while now. Part of the reason I'm doubting it is that Sony doesn't make any Micro 4/3 sensors right now, and the sensors that they make for other manufacturers, like Nikon, they already use in their own cameras as well (except the D800 sensor - for now at least).

September 15, 2012

0
Reply
avatar
Joe Marine
Editor-at-Large
Shooter/Writer/Director

I don't know what it is, but imo, the GH2, and from I can tell in the GH3 video above, just doesnt have that film look. I should say, comparing to other cameras/dslrs in its class. Dont get me wrong, the quality is amazing! I just hate that "trying to look like film" look. its cringe worthy. Im in no way a camera aficionado, which was probably obvious by not mentioning any facts to my claim, its just a personal opinion.

I know color grade and other aspects in post production could help to try and achieve a more film look, I just never seen any videos that would change my opinion. I would love for you guys to prove me wrong. Ive been looking online, and havent found anything yet. If you guys got any recommendations id love to see them.

September 15, 2012

0
Reply
george

I think the trick to that is the fact that there are countless film stocks, each with their own qualities, and many different ways of exposing and processing any given film stock. All of these things add up to different looks that traditional cinematographers have scrutinized for decades and had their own arguments over "which is best". Then we come along and try to find a camera that "looks like film". Which film? Unless you trained in traditional film cinematography (which I did not), you may have an idea of "filmic" that is one particular stock or process; or even type of lens. Nonetheless, studying the work of cinematographers you love and digging into how they created their images is a great way of developing your own. With the improved codec out of the GH3 (or any improved codec), there is going to be more room to push that image in post and make it look the way you think it should.

September 16, 2012

0
Reply

She totally forgot her bags. That's going to suck in the morning...

September 15, 2012

0
Reply
george

look pretty good for a camera that size and if its gonna be in the price range of the GH2.

On the other hand what a terrible script, terrible acting...

September 15, 2012

-1
Reply
carlos

Its PB bro. The only thing he knows is filming flowers and ducks at wide open aperture.

September 15, 2012

0
Reply
john jeffreys

What a silly thing to say

September 15, 2012

0
Reply
Andrew

@John Lol dude u r too funny. I think you comments are needed sometimes

September 16, 2012

0
Reply
middy

You should start posting some of your work for critique :)

September 16, 2012

1
Reply
avatar
Joe Marine
Editor-at-Large
Shooter/Writer/Director

john jeffreys has never made a film.

September 16, 2012

0
Reply
john jeffreys

I think JJ's an ass, but I agree re PB. Sorry. He's a TV doc cameraman. His global audience would die if they knew his rep in the UK. Please Philip, please stop making music vids, and anything with dialogue.

September 16, 2012

0
Reply
marklondon

This is not just a response to you, but regardless of resume, disrespecting other people that work in the same industry as you is not only a waste of time, but a sign of insecurity. There's enough negative energy out there, if anyone is the least bit professional, they won't take to deriding fellow filmmakers on the internet.

September 16, 2012

0
Reply
avatar
Joe Marine
Editor-at-Large
Shooter/Writer/Director

Neither the script nor the direction of actor have anything to do with Phillip Bloom but rather Bruce Logan who wrote and directed the film. PB was just DOP.

September 16, 2012

0
Reply
Andy

That was a terrible short... Looked good though!

September 15, 2012

0
Reply
Moore

$2000.00 seems too high to me when we have the D600 full frame going for around that price.

$1700.00 (or whatever the price was for the 7D when it was released) seems about right.

September 15, 2012

0
Reply
moebius22

the 7D was 1899 on release, which after tax and memory cards and stuff was essentially 2000. Now you can get one used for 900 bucks. My, how times have changed.

September 16, 2012

0
Reply
john jeffreys

Considering the great improvements to the GH2 once it was hacked, I'm extremely eager to see how this camera will function once it has a viable firmware hack. Could potentially blow every other DSLR out of the water in terms of video. At that point, even a price of around $2000 could be pretty damn attractive. I guess only time will tell.

September 15, 2012

0
Reply
Robert

As expected, lame script and bad cinematography!! I knew he can't direct from day one. He is only a good camera evaluator and fortunate enough to get his hands on all the great tools!!

Anyway, if it has a clean uncompressed HDMI out and below USD 1500 (body only), i will definitely buy this!

September 15, 2012

0
Reply

PB didn't direct this. He was only the DP.

September 16, 2012

-1
Reply

I feel the film look is determined by the lens choice... Why did Phillip Bloom decide to go with the Voightlander Nokton? Why not a Leica M known for being the best lens on the world or a Canon FD? I'm excited about the GH3 and the opportunities for film makers it's another tool to produce stunning videos. I really rate Panasonic for giving videographers a fantastic camera.

September 15, 2012

0
Reply
[•] InFrame

Is it possible to mount leica M lenses onto m4/3 via adapter?

September 16, 2012

0
Reply
john jeffreys

Yes need an adaptor for Leica M to go on the GH2.

September 17, 2012

0
Reply
InFrame

If there was no D600 then yes a price close to $2k would be OK. Now though they will need to put this at $1500 or less. Personally Im excited about using the GH3 for the increased DOF it will give you compared to full frame. In

Also it now means you can buy both the D600 for extreme/silly shallow DOF and the GH3 all for LESS than the price of a 5Dmk3 - best of both worlds!

Good times :-)

September 16, 2012

0
Reply
Paul

$2000!?

- Just go with the 5D mk ii in which case... and get it for under $2000.

September 16, 2012

0
Reply

Why the hell would you go for a used 5d when you can get a brand new D600 for the same price with a much better image, HDMI out and loads of other features?

No wonder canon get away with those over inflated prices they charge.

September 16, 2012

0
Reply
Paul

Well, there are already a ton of accessories that work with it, because its been out for 4 years.

September 16, 2012

0
Reply
john jeffreys

Pages