Reading mode: Light Dark

My last Video Project: MFT and full frame can you spot any differences?

Go to last post
I

Interceptor121

Forum Pro
Messages
12,604
Solutions
8
Reaction score
9,603
In my last project I used both the Panasonic GH5 (MFT) and the S5 (full frame in ProRes RAW 5.9K or 4k).

On the field the difference was less than most would expect to the point that I do not think anybody can tell which shots are taken with which camera although if you look deeper probably an expert eye can tell.

Note: if you see some glitches in the 4K version is because YouTube VP9 codec is a bit rubbish. Use a plugin to disable and watch in h264 even if HD if those bother you. And set your monitor refresh rate to 25/50 Hz as it is shot in 25 fps PAL
 
I couldn't tell any difference between M43 and 35mm (aka FF).

An enjoyable video though and oh, I subscribed too.

Thanks for taking the time to produce this.
 
EGuitarStar said:
I couldn't tell any difference between M43 and 35mm (aka FF).

An enjoyable video though and oh, I subscribed too.

Thanks for taking the time to produce this.
Click to expand...
Thank you I am glad you liked it. So far nobody has been able to spot such differences!
 
Donald B said:
dead givaway one camera the creek is blue the other its blown out ;-)

Don
Click to expand...
Where exactly? In no part of the video there is any clipping
 
Donald B said:
Interceptor121 said:
Donald B said:
dead givaway one camera the creek is blue the other its blown out ;-)

Don
Click to expand...
Where exactly? In no part of the video there is any clipping
Click to expand...
8.25 min :-) good try

Don
Click to expand...
If you are comparing 8:25 with 9:15, I'm pretty sure they are completely different lighting conditions. The former being heavily backlighted, thus the need for lifting shadows and blowing up highlights as a result. But that would have happened to any system.

Good try
 
that’s right

That one was a specular highlight also when looking at it with my eyes. The deer are in a shaded area and the pond is hit by sunlight and that makes it a specular highlight which by the way is not clipped but is brighter than white >90 IRE and looks like it was

instead of looking at those type of stuff you need to look at scenes with less overall brightness

Both those scenes are shot with the same camera so wrong guess entirely

--
instagram http://instagram.com/interceptor121
My flickr sets http://www.flickr.com/photos/interceptor121/
Youtube channel http://www.youtube.com/interceptor121
Underwater Photo and Video Blog http://interceptor121.com
 
Last edited:
Donald B said:
Interceptor121 said:
Donald B said:
dead givaway one camera the creek is blue the other its blown out ;-)

Don
Click to expand...
Where exactly? In no part of the video there is any clipping
Click to expand...
8.25 min :-) good try

Don
Click to expand...
This is the waveform of that scene uncorrected. The maximum light is at 95% I put a marker for you to see.

It is normal when you don't understand how exposure work to confuse lack of colour in a specular highlight with clipping. It is also made worse when you look at it on a suboptimal monitor. If you have a decent Tv with good contrast ratio it shows better there. There is no clipping in the entire clip I expose with zebra at 95% and generally reduce luminance in post



ceb99013079e409f81b60d351cebc409.jpg.png



--
instagram http://instagram.com/interceptor121
My flickr sets http://www.flickr.com/photos/interceptor121/
Youtube channel http://www.youtube.com/interceptor121
Underwater Photo and Video Blog http://interceptor121.com
 
Martin Ocando said:
Donald B said:
Interceptor121 said:
Donald B said:
dead givaway one camera the creek is blue the other its blown out ;-)

Don
Click to expand...
Where exactly? In no part of the video there is any clipping
Click to expand...
8.25 min :-) good try

Don
Click to expand...
If you are comparing 8:25 with 9:15, I'm pretty sure they are completely different lighting conditions. The former being heavily backlighted, thus the need for lifting shadows and blowing up highlights as a result. But that would have happened to any system.

Good try
Click to expand...
No it wouldnt have. thats the advantage of larger sensor and larger pixels. it would have recorded a more graduated image. Its what i noticed the most in my videos.

Don
 
Donald B said:
Martin Ocando said:
Donald B said:
Interceptor121 said:
Donald B said:
dead givaway one camera the creek is blue the other its blown out ;-)

Don
Click to expand...
Where exactly? In no part of the video there is any clipping
Click to expand...
8.25 min :-) good try

Don
Click to expand...
If you are comparing 8:25 with 9:15, I'm pretty sure they are completely different lighting conditions. The former being heavily backlighted, thus the need for lifting shadows and blowing up highlights as a result. But that would have happened to any system.

Good try
Click to expand...
No it wouldnt have. thats the advantage of larger sensor and larger pixels. it would have recorded a more graduated image. Its what i noticed the most in my videos.

Don
Click to expand...
Check the OP response. Both scenes were shot with the same camera.
 
Martin Ocando said:
Donald B said:
Martin Ocando said:
Donald B said:
Interceptor121 said:
Donald B said:
dead givaway one camera the creek is blue the other its blown out ;-)

Don
Click to expand...
Where exactly? In no part of the video there is any clipping
Click to expand...
8.25 min :-) good try

Don
Click to expand...
If you are comparing 8:25 with 9:15, I'm pretty sure they are completely different lighting conditions. The former being heavily backlighted, thus the need for lifting shadows and blowing up highlights as a result. But that would have happened to any system.

Good try
Click to expand...
No it wouldnt have. thats the advantage of larger sensor and larger pixels. it would have recorded a more graduated image. Its what i noticed the most in my videos.

Don
Click to expand...
Check the OP response. Both scenes were shot with the same camera.
Click to expand...
I think there is a lot of confusion on larger pixels and what the benefit would be. None of the scenes are clipped in the video he is looking for the wrong clues. I typically set zebra to 95% which means I have headroom in the highlights. There are some cases where I decide to go over because clipping helps the scene. At 22:00 for example there is nothing to see in the sky and the specular highlights make the deer (that is dark) standout

I give you a bit of help the scenes between 5:53 and 7:18 the two cameras are mixed

Or you can use the start of this video that is a subset check the first 1:36



In real terms it is very hard to see any difference in daylight scenes. Even the additional dynamic range is not as easy to spot as the headroom is in the specular highlights or blacks where there is no colour anyway.

--
instagram http://instagram.com/interceptor121
My flickr sets http://www.flickr.com/photos/interceptor121/
Youtube channel http://www.youtube.com/interceptor121
Underwater Photo and Video Blog http://interceptor121.com
 
Last edited:
Interceptor121 said:
that’s right

That one was a specular highlight also when looking at it with my eyes. The deer are in a shaded area and the pond is hit by sunlight and that makes it a specular highlight which by the way is not clipped but is brighter than white >90 IRE and looks like it was

instead of looking at those type of stuff you need to look at scenes with less overall brightness

Both those scenes are shot with the same camera so wrong guess entirely
Click to expand...
It is not just the blown highlight in the creek but the area behind the greek has heavy compression artifacts on my 24 in 4k screen.
 
G1Houston said:
Interceptor121 said:
that’s right

That one was a specular highlight also when looking at it with my eyes. The deer are in a shaded area and the pond is hit by sunlight and that makes it a specular highlight which by the way is not clipped but is brighter than white >90 IRE and looks like it was

instead of looking at those type of stuff you need to look at scenes with less overall brightness

Both those scenes are shot with the same camera so wrong guess entirely
Click to expand...
It is not just the blown highlight in the creek but the area behind the greek has heavy compression artifacts on my 24 in 4k screen.
Click to expand...
You can ask youtube why they use 12 mbps for 4K however other than a few coded errors this doesn’t actually show

What is the time you refer to?
 
Thank you hopefully they give the sense of peace or energy I experienced at the time
 
G1Houston said:
Interceptor121 said:
What is the time you refer to?
Click to expand...
time in the video
Click to expand...
Apologies I had not seen the subject. Such issues are not the camera fault but a side effect of my grading process and the lower delivery bitrate of youtube that in this video is as low as 10-12 mbps

This is the same frame as the camera captured it and there is no issue there

Generally compression artefacts have to do with quality of the codec and the GH5 has a 400 mbps codec that is one of the best and as shows in this video can withstand the comparison with prores raw HQ, that is we exclude some operator choices like the one I made here lol



6024a91f30014247991180990d92b140.jpg



--
instagram http://instagram.com/interceptor121
My flickr sets http://www.flickr.com/photos/interceptor121/
Youtube channel http://www.youtube.com/interceptor121
Underwater Photo and Video Blog http://interceptor121.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top