Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Olympus Micro Four Thirds

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 11, 2010, 1:54 PM   #51
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 312
Default

I have many more footages under different lighting, I cannot post them all, uploading video is a PIA and EPL1's mjpeg format adds salt on the cuts.

I think EPL1 tends to produce cold and pale-face video. If you watch Paul Treacy's video, you'll see what I mean. He has photos and video for the same speaker at the same time and you can easily see how pale his face is in the video compared to the photo. I provided the links earlier. Somehow old lenses help on this regard.
sdcs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 11, 2010, 1:57 PM   #52
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

Like I said, camera for still and camcorders for video. There is a huge difference in the 2 system. digicams are good for quick clips. That is about it. Not really great by any means.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 11, 2010, 3:33 PM   #53
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 312
Default

There's one thing though: most camcorders including professional ones have much smaller sensors than the EPL1. EPL1's large sensor is able to produce film-class video. I know Sony has come out NEX camcorders.
sdcs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 11, 2010, 3:42 PM   #54
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

The smaller sensor has an advantage and disadvantages. They hide bad details better. Same reason why the pns camera do not capture as much details as say a dslr.

Yes the nex camcorder looks to be a winner, but lighting will be a very important thing for it to avoid bad detail. Remember movie grade cameras are 35mm film. And the 3D camera are also FF. They require a ton of light. That is why the 5DMKII is a boom for the music video industry, they went form 16mm to 35mm at a very low cost. 16mm is about the size a 4/3
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 11, 2010, 3:54 PM   #55
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

There is the sony nex aps-c, the panasonic 4/3 camcorder, and then there are 1/3 and 2/3 format for pro camcorders. 8mm would be 2/3 format. Which is actually larger then most of the consumer and low grade pro camcorders.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2010, 6:16 PM   #56
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 312
Default

After some research on lenses and sensors, now I have a better understanding about all the weird things I've seen with my EPL1 so far.

Coating is just one aspect, also comes into play is invisible lights that are visible to the sensor especially CMOS type. Newer cameras like EPL1 (and Nikon, Panny etc.) deal with them by talking to the lens and do corrections correspondingly. Without this communication, it is God's guess - you can expect any kind of effects.

Auto WB is the first victim, followed by auto exposure, auto focus, CA...

Such communication may break or go wrong between an Olympus camera and Panny lens.

In video mode, such corrections may not be fully implemented or not at all because the CPU is so busy compressing video. In the end, all those nasty lens/CMOS issues will show up in video while not in stills.

So, a Panny HD lens may or may not perform well on an EPL1, depending on the communication between them and how good this lens can perform without the help from the camera. Realized this, now I'm very sure I won't buy it for my EPL1. If I really want better video, I'd buy a GH1 that comes with the HD as a kit for free.

When CMOS initially came out in cheap cameras (mostly in cellphones), we all know how bad it is compared to CCD. Now engineers have found some good algorithms to make their images much better than before. Nikon and Panny CMOS cameras all do such corrections in body while producing jpegs, Nikon even include the reference data in raw files for later processing.

When it comes to video, such real-time corrections become a challenge. Unless the Panny HD does all corrections by its own, or an agreement between Panny and Oly is implemented in the firmware, EPL1 won't get the best of it.

The paleness especially on faces we've seen in video does not have much to do with specific lighting condition, it is from the CMOS's weakness. Under some conditions, those evil lights do not exist or are not strong enough; some lenses such as the Vivitar 70-210 somehow do not pass those evil lights to the CMOS.
sdcs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2010, 6:23 PM   #57
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

I think these are all assumptions without any basis to be honest. Some may be correct, some may not be. I don't think there is any fundamental breakdown in connection between panasonic and olympus and vice versa. You present your assumptions without any real backing. Which can be dangerous for people reading. I am pretty sure if these fundamental flaws were really as much fact as you present it as such here, there would be much more talk of this.
__________________
MyFlickr
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2010, 6:49 PM   #58
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 312
Default

Of course those are my talk, nothing scientific.

Some facts are firm though:

Nikon and Panny CMOS cameras do corrections with lenses, Nikon even include the correction data in the raw files for later processing.

Auto WB, auto focus and auto exposure become inaccurate with different lenses and/or conditions.

All EPL1 video I've watched so far, share commonly to some extent the paleness especially on faces.

As said in my other post, so far I'm quite sure that CMOS cameras depend on so much on corrections which then depend on critical information from the lenses.
sdcs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2010, 7:59 PM   #59
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

But that is your assumption with the HD lens not founded in scientific testing. I had a pro camera man look at one of the video simon posted, and with a pro eye. He picked out the reason for the paleness, within a second. You over look the fact that the color was warm in the beginning. It did not get pale till the subject moved to the colder light. So you can not say the HD lens does not perform on the epl-1 or olympus m4/3.

Also your shots with the older lens were at a ideal time where the lighting was warm. But if you look at some of the people in the background without makeup and in the shade, they too were pale on my computer as well. You keep discounting that allot of HD of people on youtube and other video sites with average unmade up people do show paleness. Lighting is key, that is why all pro shot HD has good spot lighting and other lighting aids. Plus, they are always doing gray card checks, and WB updates. As outdoor lighting is aways changing.

I have compare the HD that my wife shot of people to your MF video. When shot with similar lighting, I get a nice warm video.

There is allot of things involved in shooting a good HD video. And I am not about to getting the thousands of dollar in lighting equipment for just a past time video clip with a photo camera.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2010, 8:06 PM   #60
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

Here is a GH1, and the people are pale as well, but it is due to lighting and no HD make up.
http://vimeo.com/8141453

Here is a epl-1 video, it is warm when the lighting was warm, and the people get a little pale when the light is cold.
http://vimeo.com/13022411
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.

Last edited by shoturtle; Oct 12, 2010 at 8:12 PM.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 7:35 PM.