Sony FDR AX100 versus the Panasonic GH4: 4K Video Shoot-Out 2 - Page 3 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 2Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #61 of 88 Old 06-05-2014, 08:29 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,639
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1419 Post(s)
Liked: 1534
I don't spend a lot of time over at EOSHD since they are naturally inclined toward a DSLR bias. Many of these guys are Indie type film makers or aspire to be. Since I shoot places I've visited and that type of subject matter, I'm not interested in a 'filmic look' and thus a DSLR has less value to me for shooting video. However with that said, if I actually thought that a given DSLR shot the best 4K video, I'd be there.

The RX10 was an example of me moving toward a DSLR style camera only because I thought it was shooting the best HD video at that time. Of course it couldn't offer lens options, but the great lens that was included was enough for me.

Interestingly, a recently posted video of a church interior, shot by a couple of guys, utilized something like 3 or 4 lenses with the GH4. I can tell you without a doubt, I'm not schlepping 4 lenses with me from place to place.

I downloaded the 4K video from Andrew and watched it in 4K. it was fine, but honestly, IMO, nothing special and nothing that the AX100 could not have done as well or better, including the shallower DOF shots. In fact some shots looked over-exposed to me and others looked a bit muddy. Was that the effect he wanted? I don't know.

But I can tell you this, he'll get 'ooos & ahs' from his target audience. I've seen it time and time again with the BMPCC crowd. Poorly exposed video, poorly graded video and just poor video will get the 'ooos & ahs'. I sit there and scratch my head, I really do.
Ken Ross is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #62 of 88 Old 06-05-2014, 09:54 AM
Senior Member
 
Mattias Burling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 382
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 154 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post


I downloaded the 4K video from Andrew and watched it in 4K. it was fine, but honestly, IMO, nothing special and nothing that the AX100 could not have done as well or better, including the shallower DOF shots. In fact some shots looked over-exposed to me and others looked a bit muddy. Was that the effect he wanted? I don't know.

But I can tell you this, he'll get 'ooos & ahs' from his target audience. I've seen it time and time again with the BMPCC crowd. Poorly exposed video, poorly graded video and just poor video will get the 'ooos & ahs'. I sit there and scratch my head, I really do.

But you over expose in your videos all the time, why is it different when another guy is doing it?

And I guess I must ad straight away that no im not a gh4 user nor will I ever be. Ive been reading the threads on this forum for a while now since I first was interested in buying the AX100 and Im soon making a review of it.

Now I dont know how much experience you have and from doing what. Obviously you know your way around a video camera but sometimes you point at things that arent there and being over protective of your own camera isnt exactly something shooters with experiense does.

I guess my point is,
Ken, not every video that is made needs to be turned into a battle against the AX100. The AX100 is a great camera and no one is disputing that but its not the best, because such a camera doesnt exist. It has great detail, more so than any DSLR but that doesnt equal best image quality. It only does for the individual that needs that.
Mattias Burling is offline  
post #63 of 88 Old 06-05-2014, 10:02 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 3,032
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 118 Post(s)
Liked: 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post

But you over expose in your videos all the time, why is it different when another guy is doing it?

And I guess I must ad straight away that no im not a gh4 user nor will I ever be. Ive been reading the threads on this forum for a while now since I first was interested in buying the AX100 and Im soon making a review of it.

Now I dont know how much experience you have and from doing what. Obviously you know your way around a video camera but sometimes you point at things that arent there and being over protective of your own camera isnt exactly something shooters with experiense does.

I guess my point is,
Ken, not every video that is made needs to be turned into a battle against the AX100. The AX100 is a great camera and no one is disputing that but its not the best, because such a camera doesnt exist. It has great detail, more so than any DSLR but that doesnt equal best image quality. It only does for the individual that needs that.

Mattias,

Welcome to the forum! WOW, what a place to start. Your first post and you suggest Ken, with 22,500 posts, can be defensive about his personal gear.

For me, I'm glad he is, because he and a couple other regulars have helped me learn a lot I would not have known without their careful testing and posting in "consumer" shooting situations.

Where will you be posting your AX100 review?

Bill
bsprague is online now  
post #64 of 88 Old 06-05-2014, 10:22 AM
Senior Member
 
Mattias Burling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 382
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 154 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsprague View Post

Mattias,

Welcome to the forum! WOW, what a place to start. Your first post and you suggest Ken, with 22,500 posts, can be defensive about his personal gear.

For me, I'm glad he is, because he and a couple other regulars have helped me learn a lot I would not have known without their careful testing and posting in "consumer" shooting situations.

Where will you be posting your AX100 review?

Bill

Thanks smile.gif

I guess you have to start somewhere, wasnt intended as an insult nor to argue, Im just tired of the constant bashing of other cameras and other shooters when its all suposed to be in all good fun and it all comes down to personal taste.

The review will be posted on my youtube. Im still waiting on the camera since the guy that has it now seems to take his sweet time with his review.
Mattias Burling is offline  
post #65 of 88 Old 06-05-2014, 11:16 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,639
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1419 Post(s)
Liked: 1534
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post

But you over expose in your videos all the time, why is it different when another guy is doing it?

Interesting way to start here at AVS, but OK. You say I overexpose all the time. Can you point that out to me? I acknowledged I overexposed an eagle's head in the excitement of getting the shot, but where else is this "chronic" tendency to overexpose? That hasn't been pointed out to me before, quite the contrary.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post


Now I dont know how much experience you have and from doing what.

A lot. I've done professional videos for corporate clients.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post

Obviously you know your way around a video camera but sometimes you point at things that arent there and being over protective of your own camera isnt exactly something shooters with experiense does.

You're kidding, right? May I suggest you look at the title of this thread? May I suggest you look at the comparison A/Bs (emphasis on 'comparison') I was commenting on? This thread IS about comparing the two cameras. My comments are entirely appropriate for the thread it's posted in. Oh, and let me know what I'm commenting on that 'isn't there'. I assume you watch the A/Bs in 4K on a 4K monitor?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post

I guess my point is,
Ken, not every video that is made needs to be turned into a battle against the AX100.

Battle? What 'battle'? Did I miss that? Sounds like you're the one being far too sensitive. We've only had intelligent discussions in this thread. In fact as Mark looked at the A/Bs closely, he merely confirmed some of the points I had been making. He took it the way it was meant to be taken. If you disagree with the points I made, you're welcome to refute them, but your approach here is a bit accusing and silly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post

The AX100 is a great camera and no one is disputing that but its not the best, because such a camera doesnt exist. It has great detail, more so than any DSLR but that doesnt equal best image quality. It only does for the individual that needs that.

Yes, there is no perfect camera and better resolution alone does not 'necessarily' mean the overall PQ is better. Color accuracy, noise, DR, AF and other parameters contribute to overall PQ.

You pick the winner, but I'll continue to point out differences I see in posted A/Bs.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #66 of 88 Old 06-05-2014, 12:28 PM
Senior Member
 
Mattias Burling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 382
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 154 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
You pick the winner, but I'll continue to point out differences I see in posted A/Bs.

 

There is no winner.

Point at what you want but don't say the whole "indy crowd" is bad at grading and does poor exposures when it happens to you from time to time, like for instance the eagle and the guy in the TV-Shop. I over expose from time to time as well, it happens. Even Sony over exposed in the promo for the AX100. I simply asked you why it was different when they over exposed while all the over exposed AX100 footage somehow should be left alone.

Maybe you don't have an answer and maybe it doesn't matter, I just wrote what I felt needed to be written. 

 

Now regarding this being my first post here doesn't matter to me since Ive spoken to you and a couple of the others in these threads before on other forums and I have read every single post about the AX100 on this forum. And I don't see the point in me making a hundred posts about nothing before I start saying whats really on my mind, life is to short for that.

 

And once again, I didn't wright it in affect nor to offend. I enjoy all your discussions and it has given me a lot of ideas on what to focus on in my review of the camera. I have also enjoyed everybody's  footage, including your trip to the zoo with the eagle. Sure his head was a bit white but it was majestic never the less.

Mattias Burling is offline  
post #67 of 88 Old 06-05-2014, 01:29 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,639
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1419 Post(s)
Liked: 1534
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post

There is no winner.
Point at what you want but don't say the whole "indy crowd" is bad at grading and does poor exposures when it happens to you from time to time, like for instance the eagle and the guy in the TV-Shop. I over expose from time to time as well, it happens.

I hate when people put words in my mouth. You are putting words in my mouth. I never said the entire Indie crowd is bad at grading. In a mere 2 posts you are proving you can't interpret properly what others are saying.

Further, the two clips you referenced were one I had previously acknowledged and the second was the very first clip I shot with the camera. That's far from showing a tendency toward overexposing. Stop embellishing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post

Sony over exposed in the promo for the AX100. 

That's your opinion. An overexposed cloud, not the subject of the clip, does not constitute an overexposed demo.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post

I simply asked you why it was different when they over exposed while all the over exposed AX100 footage somehow should be left alone.
Maybe you don't have an answer and maybe it doesn't matter, I just wrote what I felt needed to be written. 

And I said that overexposed AX100 footage should be left alone where? More words placed in my mouth.

If you want to have intelligent conversation here as we've been having prior to your first post, that would be welcome. However if you insist on misquoting, the discussions will end quickly.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #68 of 88 Old 06-05-2014, 02:02 PM
Senior Member
 
Mattias Burling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 382
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 154 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post



And I said that overexposed AX100 footage should be left alone where? 

 

You just did, you said one was acknowledged by you already, one wasn't the subject and that one was your first clip. 

Who says the GH4 footage wasn't over exposed of the very same three reasons ("embellishing").

 

The discussion can end, Ive already said what I felt needed to be said.

Mattias Burling is offline  
post #69 of 88 Old 06-05-2014, 02:15 PM
Advanced Member
 
Tugela's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 502
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Liked: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post

Thanks smile.gif

I guess you have to start somewhere, wasnt intended as an insult nor to argue, Im just tired of the constant bashing of other cameras and other shooters when its all suposed to be in all good fun and it all comes down to personal taste.

The review will be posted on my youtube. Im still waiting on the camera since the guy that has it now seems to take his sweet time with his review.

Yes, but Ken has owned both the AX100 and the GH4, so his opinion on the relative merits of the two cameras does carry weight. He is not defending his own camera against some other competitor, sight unseen, he is basing his opinion on personal experience.
Ken Ross likes this.
Tugela is offline  
post #70 of 88 Old 06-05-2014, 03:13 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,639
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1419 Post(s)
Liked: 1534
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post

You just did, you said one was acknowledged by you already, one wasn't the subject and that one was your first clip. 
Who says the GH4 footage wasn't over exposed of the very same three reasons ("embellishing").

The discussion can end, Ive already said what I felt needed to be said.

You are making no sense.

The first clip that I ever shot with the AX100 was of the owner of the store I bought the camera from. Did I edit that single clip? No. What would be the point of editing one single test clip, the very first clip I shot with the camera and without the utilization of zebras?

The eagle I would have liked to correct, but often an overexposed subject is lost and cannot be corrected. That was my screw up.

As Tug mentioned, I owned both cameras and intended to keep the one I felt produced the best picture. No axe to grind and no agenda other than looking for the best PQ. You may have chosen differently.

We are getting nowhere fast and you seem intent on just arguing.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #71 of 88 Old 06-05-2014, 03:55 PM
Senior Member
 
Mattias Burling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 382
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 154 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post


... you seem intent on just arguing.

 

Im really not. Thats why I won't go any further. 

Mattias Burling is offline  
post #72 of 88 Old 06-05-2014, 04:15 PM
Senior Member
 
Mattias Burling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 382
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 154 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tugela View Post


Yes, but Ken has owned both the AX100 and the GH4, so his opinion on the relative merits of the two cameras does carry weight. He is not defending his own camera against some other competitor, sight unseen, he is basing his opinion on personal experience.

 

I know he has, Ive seen every video he has on his vimeo and read every post in the threads on this forum and two others. His opinion definitely carry a lot of weight and I have learned a lot from him about the cameras as well.

But when someone, be it him or someone els is saying things that are more than just opinions and that I feel will give people that come and read these types of threads a lets say information with lesser nuance, I tend to speak up. 

I know speaking up can lead to arguing and sour faces but thats life. I never said anything hurtful or personal. 

 

So Im not gong to ad anything more on the subject. Hopefully it in the long run can get the discussion and future discussions to be more nuanced, if not, at least I tried.

 

AnyWho before I go I can contribute with a video for the topic. Ive seen a lot of discussion over the months here about shallow depth of field and small vs big sensors. Even tough people seem to be on top of it there is still some misunderstandings here and there. In the middle this video there is an explanation about how SDOF works on small sensors that might be of interest to some.

 

https://vimeo.com/19940853

Mattias Burling is offline  
post #73 of 88 Old 06-10-2014, 01:45 AM
Member
 
Cloudstrewn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 29
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 11
It's been interesting seeing how people have reacted to the two new 4K cameras GH4 and AX100.

One feature of the GH4 is how hugely customizable it is, with color balance, noise reduction, sharpness, S-curve (highlight/shadow), "master pedestal" and other parameters all easily selectable.

Just for fun, it would be great to see someone with both cameras try to create an "AX100 within a GH4" by customizing the GH4 4K video image appearance to match that of the AX100.

I don't have an AX100, but I downloaded and examined the very nice full 4K video which markr041 posted at the top of this thread comparing the two cameras. An obvious difference is the very clean (noiseless) image and occasionally appreciable edge sharpening/haloing on the AX100, and would suggest that a good place to start would be to increase GH4 noise reduction to +5 and sharpening to +3 or +4.

All these things are doable in post-processing, but so what.

Please note I am not suggesting one camera can replace the other - the physical characteristics are very different and both will have their place.
Cloudstrewn is offline  
post #74 of 88 Old 06-10-2014, 06:06 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,639
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1419 Post(s)
Liked: 1534
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloudstrewn View Post

It's been interesting seeing how people have reacted to the two new 4K cameras GH4 and AX100.

One feature of the GH4 is how hugely customizable it is, with color balance, noise reduction, sharpness, S-curve (highlight/shadow), "master pedestal" and other parameters all easily selectable.

Just for fun, it would be great to see someone with both cameras try to create an "AX100 within a GH4" by customizing the GH4 4K video image appearance to match that of the AX100.

I owned the GH4 for a period of time, concurrent with owning the AX100. I tried to recreate the AX100 look with the GH4 and simply couldn't. For one thing it just doesn't quite have the resolution of the AX100, that was clear when viewing in 4K. Further, given the greater noise levels of the GH4, to achieve an equally 'clean look', you'd probably have to further reduce the detail of the GH4 either in-camera or in post, further increasing the resolution disparity. As for chroma noise, there's less that can be done about that either in-camera or in post.

I also tried to get closer to what is, IMO, the accurate out-of-the-box color of the AX100, but again I couldn't. Even using MWB didn't result in colors that could be cut together convincingly. Sure, you probably could get relatively close with a combination of both in-camera adjustments and post-processing, but frankly I didn't think was worth it for me. It would have been a different story if it could have been achieved with a certain profile and group of settings. If you look at Mark's beach video or my Baltimore video, those are simply AX100 settings that were relatively simple to achieve and gave a look that I'd have no desire to change at all. Beach videos can be very tough on a camera in terms of image accuracy.

Having had a GH2 & a GH3 and having used a multitude of video cameras, I did think I could get to the point you were suggesting, but I was disappointed in not finding a 'quick fix'.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloudstrewn View Post


I don't have an AX100, but I downloaded and examined the very nice full 4K video which markr041 posted at the top of this thread comparing the two cameras. An obvious difference is the very clean (noiseless) image and occasionally appreciable edge sharpening/haloing on the AX100, and would suggest that a good place to start would be to increase GH4 noise reduction to +5 and sharpening to +3 or +4.

All these things are doable in post-processing, but so what.

Please note I am not suggesting one camera can replace the other - the physical characteristics are very different and both will have their place.

At least on my setup, when viewing the original file in 4K, I see no evidence of the edge sharpening/haloing. I'm emphasizing that, because I'm not sure if you're referencing viewing the 4K video in 2K or in 4K, but when viewed in 4K, I don't see anything even approaching appreciable edge sharpening or haloing. Telltale clips like tree limbs against a blue sky will almost always be a give away of this kind of artifact. Instead I just see the cut lines of the tree limbs against the sky. No haloing, ghosting or edge sharpening. Almost all of these complaints seem to come from non-owners, which makes me believe it's something in the way the clips are being viewed...usually not in 4K. wink.gif

Often, people that have seen artifacts, can usually trace their origin back to something in their signal chain, editor, frame rate differences, or streaming oddities. Lots of things can go wrong. smile.gif
Ken Ross is offline  
post #75 of 88 Old 06-11-2014, 02:23 AM
Member
 
Cloudstrewn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 29
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

I owned the GH4 for a period of time, concurrent with owning the AX100. I tried to recreate the AX100 look with the GH4 and simply couldn't.

That's a pity. I have been thinking of getting an AX100 as a run-and-gun complement to the GH4 and would like to be able to match the pictures - I had a GH3 and X900 as a pair for a while, but the image 'feel' was just too different to be able to mix them well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

At least on my setup, when viewing the original file in 4K, I see no evidence of the edge sharpening/haloing.

As a bit of ultra-pixel-peeping I've uploaded an unlisted Youtube video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kACMJTGp2c basically magnifying part of Mark R's video (hope he doesn't mind!) showing haloing along the edges of the bristles (or whatever they are called).
Cloudstrewn is offline  
post #76 of 88 Old 06-11-2014, 02:46 AM
Senior Member
 
Mattias Burling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 382
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 154 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloudstrewn View Post


I have been thinking of getting an AX100 as a run-and-gun complement to the GH4 and would like to be able to match the pictures

It is of course more than possible to match a GH4 PP to the AX100 using the settings you listed. Im not an expert on making custom picture profiles but I use profiles that others have made on my FS100.

In some cases the in camera PP dont get you all the way to what the creator wanted and you then need to have a preset or LUT in post as well for the last strech, but thats only a click of a button.

 

The K-Log from Frank Glencairn is a good example. He whanted to in camera simulate Kodachrome and it does verry well but to get it to look just right he uses a LUT. While his G-Logg or some of James Millers PPs are great straight from the camera.

 

The GH4 is still a bit new but I belive  more Custom PPs will show up as time moves on. You could try to ask at dvxuser to se if there is a good colorist there that will point you in the right direction or even makes one for you if it turnes out to be an easy fix. IMO it should be easy for an experienced colorist/DP/operator.

 

I dont have a GH4 but som colleges do and Im getting an AX100 from Sony to review hopefully next week so I might be able to ask around.

Mattias Burling is offline  
post #77 of 88 Old 06-12-2014, 05:53 AM
Member
 
Cloudstrewn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 29
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post
I dont have a GH4 but som colleges do and Im getting an AX100 from Sony to review hopefully next week so I might be able to ask around.
Thanks, that's kind of you.
Cloudstrewn is offline  
post #78 of 88 Old 06-12-2014, 07:19 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,639
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1419 Post(s)
Liked: 1534
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloudstrewn View Post


As a bit of ultra-pixel-peeping I've uploaded an unlisted Youtube video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kACMJTGp2c basically magnifying part of Mark R's video (hope he doesn't mind!) showing haloing along the edges of the bristles (or whatever they are called).


But you see, that's just it, who 'utra-pixel-peeps'. When viewing AX100 content the way normal people would, on a UHD TV or HDTV, you don't see this.


I could care less about how something looks when we apply a magnifying glass. It seems in virtually every case where haloing or EE is discussed, it's always when pixel peeping.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #79 of 88 Old 06-12-2014, 07:22 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,639
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1419 Post(s)
Liked: 1534
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post

It is of course more than possible to match a GH4 PP to the AX100 using the settings you listed. Im not an expert on making custom picture profiles but I use profiles that others have made on my FS100.


It is? Can you point me to the videos that show that? It's one thing to say 'it's more than possible' and it's quite another to show the actual proof of this.


Since the measured resolution of the GH4 is less than that of the AX100, it will be quite impossible to change that, regardless of settings. So right out of the gate, you won't ever be quite there.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #80 of 88 Old 06-12-2014, 11:07 PM
Senior Member
 
SD90's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 368
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
Since the measured resolution of the GH4 is less than that of the AX100, it will be quite impossible to change that, regardless of settings.
One image quality advantage of the GH4 for making Youtube videos is that when you shoot complex subjects like green meadows and forests in 4K and then upload to Youtube, upon playback at 360p or 480p (which is the speed most people play Youtube videos due to internet speed constraints) and even sometimes at 720p a lot of the green foliage ends up looking moderately smeared and muddy as is plainly evident in the first minute or two of the 9 minute AX100 video below:

The GH4 doesn't have nearly as much of that smeared-muddy look problem when viewed at 360p or 480p, so even if it's measured resolution in a controlled studio setting is a bit better than the AX100, in real world shooting of complex landscapes it can often produce Youtube videos that look clearer when played at 360p and 480p


Last edited by SD90; 06-13-2014 at 01:33 AM.
SD90 is offline  
post #81 of 88 Old 06-13-2014, 08:45 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,639
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1419 Post(s)
Liked: 1534
^ First off, not sure what you're seeing, but I don't see what you're talking about at all. Both look pretty much the same to me at 360, a blurry mess relative to their potential.

Second, these are totally different subjects, totally different places with totally different lighting and details.

Third, you have no idea how these were edited, uploaded or re-encoded. There are so many variables that this couldn't be a more unscientific, uncontrolled 'experiment'. It says absolutely nothing and I wouldn't present this as 'evidence' of anything to anyone. It's just silly.

Fourth, considering the 4K video from the AX100 is cleaner, again it makes no sense that a lower resolution version would suddenly do a 180 at a lower resolution.

Fifth, even if all this were true, I'd never choose a 4K camera on the basis of how well it plays at 360 or 480p. That's beyond silly.

Some posts leave me almost speechless, this is one of them.

Last edited by Ken Ross; 06-13-2014 at 08:52 AM.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #82 of 88 Old 06-13-2014, 01:00 PM
Senior Member
 
Mattias Burling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 382
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 154 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
It is? Can you point me to the videos that show that? It's one thing to say 'it's more than possible' and it's quite another to show the actual proof of this.


Since the measured resolution of the GH4 is less than that of the AX100, it will be quite impossible to change that, regardless of settings. So right out of the gate, you won't ever be quite there.
Im not sure I follow you. A guy asks if a camera with the ability to make custom picture profiles can be made so it matches the AX100. I say that Im sure it can since thats basically one of the main points of having that ability.
I say that I will ask around and see what I can find out since Im only a user of PPs and not a maker. You then want me to show the results before hand as some sort of "proof". How on earth would I be able to do that?

And also I don't follow you on matching resolution, thats not what matching cameras is about.
Matching a camera is about making them cut together so the viewer doesn't get confused, its about colors and contrast not pixels. This is done all the time.
How many movies do you think have the same camera all through out. Both in TV and movie production there have been varieties of cameras since the beginning of time and not to mention all the freelancers out there that have A- and B-cams from different brands.
It is possible to match the AX100 to a cell phone if you want to depending on how much time you are willing to spend, and just to be clear, no Im not talking resolution, that has nothing to do with this subject.

But thats where custom PP comes in. It enables you to setup your camera to be as close as possible to the camera you intend to match to before you hit record. And as I said in my first post, if it doesn't get you all the way you might have to use a LUT for the last stretch.
Im also a bit confused that you tried this with the white balance since thats scene depended and its probably the last thing to use when trying to match two cameras.
Mattias Burling is offline  
post #83 of 88 Old 06-13-2014, 02:19 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,639
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1419 Post(s)
Liked: 1534
I'm fully aware of what a PP does, but that was not how I interpreted your original statement. You spoke about 'matching' the AX100's picture with the PP of the GH4. To me that's different than 'cutting' them together in a video. Cutting & matching are two different meanings as far as I'm concerned.

As for resolution, sure, an AX100 sharper output can always be softened in post, but that was not the thrust of your comment as I understood it.

As I said before, I tried to 'come close' to the picture that the AX100 produces with my GH4 and could not do it. No matter how I adjusted the color within any given PP, the color was just not close enough that I would comfortably cut the two together. I have never been a believer that because a camera has Profiles, it guarantees you can match other cameras to it. Too many variables. Certainly profiles give you flexibility in output, but it doesn't ensure a match.

I agree that in post you can bring them closer together, but that was not what I was after. Since I was so happy with the 'look' and color of the AX100, it was a prime consideration of mine to see if I could get the GH4 to do the same. It was never my intent to get somewhat in the ballpark and then be required to do further work in post. For me, this was pure run n gun and I didn't want the extra work in post.

I'm sure many are more proficient with the PPs than I am, so I would like to see those results. That's why I asked you.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #84 of 88 Old 08-01-2014, 08:05 AM
Member
 
earwax69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 28
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hi, just watched the first comparison video on page 1. I work in post-prod, compositing, keying, motion design... that kind of stuff. When watched on Vimeo, the clear winner was the GH4. But I downloaded the 4k video and watched it on my 30inch monitor. I changed my mind. There's a blotchiness in the details of the GH4 that will create problems in post. Less data available to work with. I would choose the fdr-ax100 over the GH4 when in need of clarity. It would give me handle to crop and grade as I wish. I believe I would get a more cinematographic image out of it.

However clarity is not all. The fdr-ax100 is just not an option if you need shallow DoF. The dof on it is not pleasing and you can't stick a f1.4 lens on it.

For story driven films I would choose the GH4 (with a f1.4 lens). For documentary, urban stuff and everything else, I would choose the ax100.

As for the sharper image of the ax100, it's clearly not just the heavier software sharpening. The lens is better (see the clean corners) and the sensor give you higher resolution. I dont know about the specs, but it's what I see.
earwax69 is offline  
post #85 of 88 Old 08-03-2014, 07:37 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,313
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 196 Post(s)
Liked: 143
Zoom and Bokeh

The GH4 cannot beat the AX100 for zooming. You get a power zoom, with no hesitations, flicker, or re-focus, and amazing detail at the telephoto end. And it is 12X.

This short video shows the zoom in action (and does not make you sick) that focuses in on a scene miles away:

https://vimeo.com/102450384

And the ability to get pleasing dof effects from the AX100 should not be under-estimated. This video tests the dof to achieve 3D-like effects using the AX100:

https://vimeo.com/101941550


Video frame grab:


Ken Ross likes this.

Last edited by markr041; 08-03-2014 at 10:06 AM.
markr041 is offline  
post #86 of 88 Old 08-03-2014, 09:16 AM
Member
 
David Harry's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 129
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post
The GH4 cannot beat the AX100 for zooming. You get a power zoom, with no hesitations, flicker, or re-focus, and amazing detail at the telephoto end. And it is 12X.

This short video shows the zoom in action (and does not make you sick) that focuses in on a scene miles away:

https://vimeo.com/102450384

And the ability to get pleasing dof effects from the AX100 should not be under-estimated. This video tests the dof to achieve 3D-like effects using the AX100:

https://vimeo.com/101941550
Hi Mark.

I wouldn't bother trying to convince people of things that they either don't understand or won't see. Your work speaks for itself.

The AX100 is an amazing camera, period. I have done a number of blind test scenarios with cameras costing many times its price, and people can't tell.

I even done a test with a load of DOF and a 2.35.1 crop, and had it going up against Red footage, with both being played out at 1080. People chose the AX footage as being the best looking. This test doesn't mean anything other than, the AX100 will produce excellent end results.

I find it really funny that someone who works in post, then starts bleating on that you can't add f1.4 glass to the 100. Anyone that I know who works professionally at either end of a camera, doesn't really confess to knowing too much about the other end. Everyone seems to be an expert at everything on the internet.

Anyone who knows what they are doing will make great pictures with any camera. Some cameras are just simply easier than others to operate, and some allow for great pictures without too much fuss.

It's not rocket science it's skill, and the AX100 is just another tool, all be it a brilliant one at a brilliant price.

Maybe those who want to mouth off about the so called lacking features of the AX, or any camera for that matter. Should really be showing their own work off, just as proof that they have the creditiblity for making such statements. Remember, any idiot can say anything on the internet.

Cheers,
Dave.
Ken Ross likes this.
David Harry is offline  
post #87 of 88 Old 08-03-2014, 10:31 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,639
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1419 Post(s)
Liked: 1534
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post

And the ability to get pleasing dof effects from the AX100 should not be under-estimated. This video tests the dof to achieve 3D-like effects using the AX100:

https://vimeo.com/101941550


Mark, this is the first time I can recall you using music in a video. I like it here and thought it fit. I've gotten away from that myself and was thinking I'd go back to it where it works. I used it effectively in a trip we took to Alaska.

You mentioned 'enhanced' in the video description. What was the nature of the enhancement? You certainly achieved the '3D effect' with the shallow DOF in many of the shots.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #88 of 88 Old 08-03-2014, 11:10 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,313
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 196 Post(s)
Liked: 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
Mark, this is the first time I can recall you using music in a video. I like it here and thought it fit. I've gotten away from that myself and was thinking I'd go back to it where it works. I used it effectively in a trip we took to Alaska.

You mentioned 'enhanced' in the video description. What was the nature of the enhancement? You certainly achieved the '3D effect' with the shallow DOF in many of the shots.

"Enhanced" was to add music, using Vimeo's offerings. The exact same video without the music is also posted: https://vimeo.com/101870112


Since this particular video did not have any interesting ambient sound track (no musicians or cars or trains or planes), and I was not trying to convey a sense of place, I thought music might be more appropriate.
markr041 is offline  
Reply Camcorders

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off