M43 videos - show yours

There is no doubt that GH AF in video is better than DSLR. But, as I have explained, the AF-C is far from perfect.

Let's hear from you guys. What do you do in videos? Please let us enjoy your videos!

What do the pros do? We have seen Vincent Munier's Summer Variations - Nikon D3S. This pro built on the D3s weather sealing and high ISO to ability create impressive wildlife videos. The short clips mixed with stunning still photographs by a fine editor is a multimedia treat.

http://vimeo.com/10352097

Then, there is award winning photographer Bob Krist. He did a short documentary on a costume shop. Notice how he has to use fixed focus points. But, the D7000's fine low light ability and Nikon's array of lenses allows him to work in available light; and with a fisheye lens in tight conditions.

http://www.vimeo.com/20045301

A fine job by an amateur videographer. Here's his list of equipment. Inexpensive lenses, small and versatile.

http://www.pixiq.com/article/my-lenskit-for-video-with-the-nikon-d7000

What do you use for different occasions?

Not one of mine (not made any videos other than family clips with my GH2 yet) - but here's a good example, from Bruce Dale of the National Geographic:

http://vimeo.com/14725884

Here's a video I made with my GH1 using a legacy OM 50mm f1.8 (hacked to remove the aperture stops), an OM 28mm f2.8 and a few shots with the 20mm f1.7 with a (crap) x0.5 wide angle converter.

http://vimeo.com/14195011

I had fun shooting that, the large sensor lets you play around with depth of field and out of focus areas.

The last scene where your dog cuddles the cat is really sweet.

--
Mark.

This was one of my first efforts, and is typical of the type of use i am putting my gh2 to. Unfortunately i do not have the eye/imagination/talent etc to make 'movies' as such, but i am happy enough just grabbing some movie clips as an extra reminder of my wildlife photographic 'days out' {alongside my usual stills photography}.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=9kYM30t4_9Q

I think the gh2 has given me a new lease of life, and even expands the capabilities of my usual Nikon lenses, thanks to the EX Tele Conv function.





Hopefully my 'short movies' will improve over time, but i'm not holding my breath.

Alan

Hi Alan,

I'm interested in your opinion about ETC. Is it really that useful? Do you see much noise at 1080 or 720?

Hello Happyvan..........................yes, i do find the EX Tele Con extremely useful.

I am still trying to get comfortable with the different 'field of view' when using the same prime lens on the gh2, AND my nikon dslr, and also the differing EX tele magnification between the 1080i {2.6x} and 720p {3.9x}.

I sometimes have to switch between 1080i and 720p, if ive judged my shooting distances wrongly, to change the Tele magnification and allow me to get my subject comfortably within the frame {if i am unable to change my shooting position}.

Ive become so used to stills photography {where i often have the option to switch to 'portrait' format}, that i keep forgetting that i can not do this with movie clips.

So far, ive been experimenting with the EX tele function mainly in coastal areas, where the wildlife tends to keep their distance, due to the general public/dog walkers etc, but there are usually multiple opportunities there.

As soon as i get more familier with all the new options {FOV's/ shooting distances etc} of the M4/3 format, i will be able to put this EX Tele feature to wider wildlife uses.

I only use the electronic viewfinder, and although i was initially 'unsure' about it, i quite like it now.

I find it very easy to MF with, and although i can zoom-in {at a push of a button}, i have yet to feel the need to use that function.

Its a different 'ball game' to stills photography though {some things seem easier/some things more difficult}, and although the GH2 allows the user to take a stills photograph whilst filming a movie, i feel this is very impracticle with my set-up, due to the need to often use a ND filter whilst filming a movie clip, and having to shoot through this filter for a stills image, {so i don't bother using that feature at all}.

I think its a wonderful little camera, and although i will remain with my old nikon dslr for stills, the GH2 will eventually replace it {when my old nikon finally dies}.

I had intended to also use the GH2 for BIF shooting {using my 45-200}, but after giving it try {over a two day period}, ive decided to continue with my nikon for that type of shooting, and just use the 45-200 as part of a travel/lightweight general purpose wildlife movie tele-zoom {with the aid of the EX Tele Con feature, when necessary}.

Although the M4/3 system is very light, compared to my Nikon gear, ive found that shooting movies with it has sometimes 'increased' the weight of gear that i have to carry, as i now HAVE TO lug a tripod around with me, whereas previously i often only used a monopod with my main telephoto.

Alan

I shot the clip below with either the 14mm or the 20mm and the ETC mode in 1080p @ 24 FPS. The ISO was probably above 1600 in this dark corner even at 1/50 of a second shutter speed. ETC is absolutely wonderful at ISO 160. It is indistinguishable from the equivalent non ETC mode at the lowest ISOs. However, noise becomes an issue above ISO 640. By ISO 1600 it is very distracting like the clip below shows.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ln0zQRxAEdQ&t=1m42s

ETC is best used in outdoor situations with evenly lit subjects that are VERY far away. Slap the 45-200mm on the GH2, put it in 720p @ 60 FPS, crank the aperture down to F9.0, set it to AFC, and you can follow birds in flight even with tight framing.

HappyVan said:

Hi Alan,

I'm interested in your opinion about ETC. Is it really that useful? Do you see much noise at 1080 or 720?

Click to expand...

--
GH2, GF1, & ZS3 Sample movies
http://www.youtube.com/user/mpgxsvcd#play/uploads
http://vimeo.com/user442745
GF1 Pictures
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/4222674355/albums

Hello mpgxsvcd,
Great quality video!

I remember seeing that video a while ago, and it was one of the video's that convinced me that the gh2 was a worthwhile buy for me.

I agree that the EX Tc performs well over longish distances {visibility allowing}.

With regards to BIF shooting, i found that my gh2/45-200 would lock-on reasonable quickly and positively to birds that had strongly contrasting plumage {such as Oystercatchers and juvenile gulls}, but had great difficulty in staying locked-on to mature {white plumaged} gulls, even for a few seconds.

The gh2's AF certainly seemed quite sensitive/quick, although this can be a problem for BIF shooting, as it would immediately loose focus, if the focus-area momentarily leaves the target. It would then take too long to regain focus.

My old Nikon D2h {and some other dslr's} allow a slight focus-lag to be set, which allows the camera to continue tracking the subject, even if the focus area has momentarily lost its position on the subject.

I also found that shooting BIF when hand holding did not give comfortable results to my eye, as any fluctuation in the birds flightpath, combined with fluctuations in my ability to keep the focus-area steady on the subject for a few seconds, gave an uncomfortable 'wobblyness' effect against the edges of the frame. The light weight of the GH2/45-200 was also not ideal for this type of hand-held shooting {for me}, although it was slightly better if i attatched an unextended monopod to the camera, to add some weight.

Its possible that more practice would help, but i'm not convinced that i will ever get reasonably consistant hand-held movie BIF results, compared to stills BIF.

Part of the problem for hand-held movie BIF {for me} is keeping locked smoothly onto the subject for a few seconds at a time {for a decent clip length}, compared to only needing to keep locked onto a subject for a second or two with stills BIF shooting {for a possibly a good number of frames}.

If Panasonic ever decide to issue a firmware upgrade, to allow AF-Tracking with the movie mode, i will probably return to 'movie BIF shooting'. Until then, all my BIF stuff will be done with stills.

Alan

Here's my 1080 contribution from GH1 + 100-300.

http://www.vimeo.com/20569744

Started the camera rolling when the subject was almost a hundred meters away. I reduced the video to the last 1:45. You can see how confused the GH1 computer became as the subject moved off center and other birds entered the scene.

PDAF, predictive tracking and Dynamic AF would have made a world of difference. And, you could allow the subject to move off-center.

The wobbly tripod and my inability to zoom the lens smoothly didn't help. The 100-300 has a manual focus mechanism as bad as a kit lens. So, there's not much more that I can do with this combo.

Even with its industry-best AF-C, these cameras can only produce useable short clips.

I'm waiting for Sony VG-20, or a Nikon mirrorless camera with AF-C ability with regular lenses. Meanwhile, I just hope that D400 has decent AF-F.

Let's hear from the rest of you guys! I love the narrative possibilities of video. Let's share!

Might I suggest that a 24-70 (equivalent) f2.8 would work better in that situation

Here's a terrific production from Chase Jarvis using a crippled D7000! Note the amazing low light ability of the camera. Is the GH2 as good?

He has a way with motion.

http://ca.video.search.yahoo.com/search/video?p=d7000

here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMbBKukJzBk

How about the romantic episodes from Fenchel and Janisch...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJk4tMfznZY&feature=related

The point is that GH2's AF-C is not a critical consideration for creative videographers like Chase Jarvis and Fenchel. Lenses are more important as demonstrated in Alan's and mpgxsvcd's video.

Any camera that handles well can do the job. In fact, DSLRs have great strengths that extend the limit of movie making. For example, low light ability and intervalometer and an array of lenses that function at the focal length they were designed for.

For a the still photographer like me, I have to carefully consider the balance of video and still ability.

Ideally, a hybrid should be competent in both. Without this balance of abilities, you have to make a choice if you can only bring one camera. Do video with an occasional still. Or, do great still photography with an occasional video clip like Munier.

IMO, there are no successful hybrids at this time. All the candidates are too compromised by their form factor or lack of development. But, my bet is that DSLR can improve their video image quality and video AF faster than mirrorless can improve their still photography capabilities (lenses, noise performance and AF tracking).

You may think that mirrorless will conquer the world because of its video capability. So, show us your video!