GH3 VS GH2 (Video)

Photo Credit: Danny J Kirsic

We recently picked up the Panasonic GH3 for our copter arsenal and wanted to share a comparison between the GH3 and our faithful GH2. While this post is meant to showcase the images and features of the two, much of the following is inexact science and biased towards the necessary features and settings that help us make these cameras fly.  

Our hacked GH2 was the first camera we flew on our Cinestar 8 multi-rotor, mostly filming with Nick Driftwood's Orion v4b patch. The patch is stable at 24p and handles the endless motion of the moving copter well. The GH2 packs a major punch when it comes to image quality and its size and weight allow us to keep the copter in the air for extended periods of time. See the video below, which was shot entirely with our GH2's: 

Panasonic's GH3 is a larger body than its predecessor and comes filled with new features for both video and stills. Its size will continue to get us laughed at by those unfortunate few who judge cameras based on size rather than image quality. Depending on what record mode you choose, the new body offers bit rates of 72, 50, 28, 24, 20, 17, 10 and 4Mbps. For our testing, we shot 24p at 50Mbps with the GH3's new QuickTime wrapper.  

To roughly match bitrates, we shot with Chris Brandin's 44M patch on the GH2. Both cameras were set to "Standard" with Contrast=0, Sharpness=0, Saturation=0 and Noise Reduction=0. White balance was matched in every shot. All footage was filmed with Panasonic's 14-42 kit lens. See the ground-based test below.

Note: This test is not exact science. While it won't answer every question about how the two cameras compare, it's an accurate representation of what a GH2 and GH3 look like side-by-side when shooting with comparable bitrates and settings. Feel free to discuss your opinion on the two camera images in the comments below.

Note: Head over to http://www.personal-view.com/ and immerse yourself in everything GH2 & GH3. It's a great community full of people striving to make these little cameras shoot the best image possible. Please take the time to donate!

How does the GH3 fly?

The GH3 flies nearly identical to the GH2. We didn't put a timer on it, but two parallel 4S batteries got us well over twelve minutes on the CS8 and we only brought the copter down because we wanted to check takes. As with every camera, mounting and balancing the GH3 on the Freefly 3-axis gimbal provided initial challenges, but the adaptability of the gimbal allowed us to place the camera to our liking. (We do recommend a right-angle HDMI adapter.)

Below is some ridiculous GH3 footage from our Cinestar 8 multi-rotor. This footage is for testing purposes only. We dialed in picture settings by shooting on "Standard" with a -4,-2,-2,-5 configuration. The images were graded in Apple Color. Enjoy!

This GH3 Test Footage showcases some of the SICKEST moves we've ever flown:

The image below is a comparison of the original .mov file and graded frame from our GH3 test shoot.

Features we like about the GH3 that the GH2 doesn't have:

1080p at 60fps: The $16,000 Canon C300 doesn't even offer this. (There are a lot of things we like about the C300 though.) Ninety-percent of the time we shoot at 24P, but now we have the capability of shooting over-cranked without having to stick a different camera on the copter.

Clean HDMI output: The GH2 takes footage shot at 720p60 and converts it to interlaced when an HDMI cable is attached. Shooting and monitoring at 60p on the GH2 without an FPV camera is impossible. The GH3 takes care of this ridiculous quirk and allows us to monitor our over-cranked footage.

The new QuickTime wrapper: We can review footage the instant it has been transferred to a computer. For those of us still killing it in FCP7, the .mov files can be dropped directly into Compressor for conversion. Also, no more hoping clients have VLC player!

Extended Battery Life: A day of shooting (from the copter) can now be accomplished with two batteries instead of five or six. But at $80 a battery, we can't wait for the Chinese knockoffs.

Faster Auto Focus: Able to focus at 240fps, the GH3 does a nice job with its faster autofocus functionality. There is still some "searching" when tracking an object. Will we use this feature in the air? Not right now. We set focus to infinity in manual mode, but as gimbals evolve and longer lenses become part of our setup, we've got a camera capable of tracking moving objects. 

Features we don't like about the GH3:

The Electronic View Finder: It's horrific. The EVF casts a magenta tone over the image and is far from sharp. Focusing is tough. Fortunately, the camera's bright and vivid OLED touchscreen makes up for the EVF miscue.

Wifi: It's a very cool concept that allows realtime viewing and control of settings on iOS or Android devices. However, at the time of this posting, it's missing a ton of features that would actually make it useful. The iPad image freezes when recording begins, meaning you can't see anything the camera is recording. Also, recording can only be stopped at the camera itself, unless you set a specific time limit on a shot. You cannot review playback of video. The iPad recognizes video files are present, but will not allow review. For now, there are too many flaws that make Wifi more of a hassle than solution. 

GH2 or GH3?

Both! Yes, the GH3 offers new functionality. Much of which help us meet client needs. But the GH2 has years of testing and patches under its belt, making it capable of producing an incredibly beautiful picture. We'll continue to keep both cameras in our bag...while waiting patiently for the GH3 to be hacked.

Comments or questions? Email us through our contact page or find us on Facebook and Twitter.

Xoar carbon fiber props

We've recently been fortunate to try out Xoar's new PJP-T carbon fiber props on one of our multirotors.  We want to share our first impressions of these beauties.  And they really do make quite the first impression - they look great bolted to brushless motors mounted on carbon fiber booms.

They're ridiculously light and very strong.  They only weigh 12 grams!  That's less than half the weight of Xoar's popular beechwood props (which we use on our heavy lifter Cinestar 8).  We put them on the prop balancer, and they're spot on.  There's no need to balance them because they're ready to fly.

And how do they fly?  Really well. The light weight allows the multirotor motors to react quickly.  When it inevitably gets windy, quick reactions are important.  And when you want maximum flight time, every gram counts. 

If it sounds like we're gushing over these props, it's because they're worthy of the praise.  Are the Xoar carbon fiber props worth the investment for your multirotor?  If you want the best, absolutely. 

Comments or questions? Email us through our contact page or find us on Facebook and Twitter.

Want to learn more about multirotors?  Visit MultiRotorForums.com

Droidworx Retractable Landing Gear

We were one of the first recipients of Droidworx's new retractable landing gear.  They were part of a prize package from a contest at MultiRotorForums.  Our first impression?  They're cool!  Once you get beyond the cool factor, you realize that these are well engineered landing gear. 

They're lightweight, with extensive use of carbon fiber and aluminum.  A Spektrum servo is used for operating the retracts.  That servo plugs into your receiver, so you can use a switch on the transmitter to operate them. 

Why would you need retractable landing gear?  Some camera gimbals can pan 360 degrees (the third axis of a 3-axis gimbal).  Some of these gimbals don't have landing hear that turn with them, so you need landing gear that can swing up and out of the way for an unobstructed view. When it's time to pack the copter down, you can pop off the legs via some heavy duty plastic clips. 

Once we do some more testing with the copter, we'll attach a camera gimbal to do some filming, but for now here's a short video showing off how the Droidworx retractable landing gear work. The Droidworx XM6 will be a nice addition to our fleet. 

Comments or questions? Email us through our contact page or find us on Facebook and Twitter.

2012 WITH THE CINESTAR 8...

Yonder Blue Films is a production company based near Atlanta, and we’ve had many people contact us about our low-altitude aerial video shot with our Cinestar 8 multirotor copter.  So we’ve decided to share a review.  Before we get to the review, here’s a sample of some of the shoots this year with the Cinestar.

We purchased our Cinestar 8 frame early in 2012 and started assembly while wrapping up a TV show for NBC Universal. The instruction manual for the frame was clear and allowed me to put it together on my dining room table fairly easily, with a fair amount of patience from my wife.  At first, I was struck by how simple the design seemed.  But this simplicity has proven to be a very smart design.  Many of the parts are interchangeable which means we don’t require as many spare parts lying around.  Also, once you assemble one section, other parts are similar in assembly.  It took some serious engineering skills to simplify the construction of this frame and allow for the reuse of parts.  This frame is also very adaptable to a variety of setups.

I purchased the Cinestar 8 frame from Quadrocopter.  I used their RTF Cinestar as a guide for how I would outfit our Cinestar 8, but I also made some changes based off some research.  I did start with the standard QC-3328 motors combined with APC SlowFly props in the 14x4.7 size.  This is a good motor / prop pair for lifting mirrorless cameras and some smaller DSLRs.  We did discover later that for larger DSLRs like the 5D MkIII and camcorders like the Sony FS700, that we preferred the Xoar wooden props in the 14x5 size.  But for cameras like the Panasonic GH2, we’ve stuck with the APC SlowFly.  

For the flight controller, I did head in a different direction.  The Cinestar frame was designed around MK electronics, but is easily adapted to other flight controllers.  I did a lot of research before deciding on our flight controller.  At the time, the three main contenders were MK, DJI, and Hoverfly.  I found people having success with all three of these flight controllers.  I ended up choosing the Hoverfly Pro.  Here’s how I went about making that decision.  First, I did a lot of reading on forums like MultiRotorForums.com.  Second, I took a look at the manuals for each of the three - I knew I’d be spending a lot of time with my nose buried in one of those manuals, so I figured I should take a look at them.  Third, I contacted a few folks that were using them.  What really sealed the deal for me was an endorsement for the Hoverfly Pro from Mike Hagadorn of Cloud Level Media.  He was getting great results with a Cinestar / Hoverfly combo.  Also, the Hoverfly had the easiest setup, is based in the U.S., and I could get customer support from them easily.  It flies awesome too!

When purchasing the parts for our first large multi-rotor, I didn’t hesitate in going with the more expensive parts.  I wanted the best.  One area where I was hesitant was the ESCs.  These plug in between the flight controller and the motors.  I went with Turnigy Plush ESCs.  I was hesitant about them because they were fairly inexpensive compared to other ESCs on the market, but they had a good reputation. They’ve proven to be “bulletproof” as it says on the label. They’re easy to program too if you have the programming card.  Their only drawback is a bit of noise, and I may check out some Castle Creations ESCs at some point since they are a bit quieter.  

We’ve put over 1300 flights on our Cinestar in a variety of locations: lakes, rivers, inside retail stores, factories, museums, across the globe.  To sum up our experience with the Cinestar in one word - awesome.  This flying carbon fiber beast has performed like a champ.  The frame has held up great under the stress of a lot of use in tough conditions. It has proven to be strong and durable.  Most of the frame still looks new!  Below is some footage from one particularly tough shoot.

The adaptability of the frame has definitely been a huge asset.  We’ve really taken advantage of this with the gimbal. We initially used the 2-axis Cinestar gimbal, then quickly upgraded to the 3-axis gimbal for more shot options.  Being able to shift parts around on the gimbal allows you to properly balance a variety of cameras on the gimbal.  We’ve discovered that balancing the camera is very critical with the gimbal stabilization systems that have been released in 2012, like the Hoverfly Gimbal board and Freefly’s Radian system.  Freefly, the manufacturer of the Cinestar line, has released several tutorial videos on how to properly balance a camera on the gimbal.  Some of the other gimbals on the market don’t really allow for these adjustments.  

On a recent shoot in Oklahoma we needed to film some slow-motion footage with the Sony FS700 - a fairly long camera when compared to the DSLRs that we typically fly.  It was clear that the FS700 wouldn’t fit on the stock gimbal, but this is where that adaptability came into play.  I simply purchased longer carbon fiber arms from Quadrocopter, a Freefly distributor, and swapped out the stock arms.  This allowed us to successfully fly the camera and pull off some fun slow-motion footage from the air.  I actually bought a single boom arm from Quadrocopter, then cut it in half, only to discover a few days later that they sell arms that are already cut to length - should’ve called them first.

A few other features of the Cinestar have been very nice.  The flight battery is mounted on the center of the frame, which keeps it balanced in flight.  There are o-rings between the copter and gimbal that isolate any motor vibrations to keep them from reaching the camera gimbal.  Since most of it is constructed from carbon fiber, it is very lightweight while remaining tough.  I’ve found it to be easy to work on as access to screw heads is easy.  I’m sure there are a few other highlights I’m ignoring, but obviously my review of the Cinestar is overwhelmingly positive.  Below is a highlight video from a 3 day shoot at Belmont University.  

To be fair, there are a few small things that I think could be improved, but I’m no engineer.  The screws used require a 2.5mm driver or a 2mm driver.  Most of them require a 2.5mm hex screwdriver - those work great. The button head screws that use a 2mm hex screwdriver aren’t quite as tough, so be careful with them.  I’ve mangled two of them, but fortunately the kit includes some spares.  The second issue is really a tradeoff.  The Cinestar can pack down really small, which is helpful when you need to check it at the airport.  The downside is that it can take a bit of time to reassemble it on location.  A second pair of hands is very helpful though, and an electric screwdriver speeds up the process immensely.  For shoots around Atlanta, we just keep it assembled as it fits in our vehicle.  Overall these issues are minor, and Freefly Systems is continuing to add updates to the Cinestar - a few are hinted at in the comments of this recent test video.  

After a day of filming for John GraceObviously, we’re very happy with the Cinestar and all of the components we’ve chosen to install on it.  Freefly has designed an impressive multirotor for aerial cinematography, and it is fun to fly.  But the best thing about this whole endeavour has been the human element.  We’ve made many new friends since getting our Cinestar airborne.  The multirotor industry is chock full of some awesome and generous people.  The team of geniuses at Hovefly, the helpful crew at Quadrocopter, all the great members of MultiRotorForum and Freefly forum, the fun folks we’ve flown for, and the super supportive Freefly Systems - they’ve all been great.  Just one example of many, I needed some spare props really quick that I couldn’t find in stock in the U.S.  I posted my dilemma on a forum.  That same day, Tabb Firchau owner of Freefly shipped some out to me.  They don’t sell props, they just had some spares and sent a pair my way.  The only question, “How fast do you need them?”  I’ve got several of these stories, and I’m sure that 2013 will bring many more.

Want to comment on this post?  Leave us some feedback on our Facebook page or Twitter.  

All the best,
Yonder Blue Films
“Impossible Made Beautiful”


Disclaimer: While we received no financial compensation for this article, we have beta tested products for Freefly and won a contest that included products from some of the manufacturers mentioned.  But that has not biased this article in any way.

COPTER GUTS!

We took some time to do a systems check on the YBF multirotor. August and September provided us with a demanding shooting schedule, making copter maintenance a priority during downtime. Below are a few shots of the vital organs of our Cinestar 8.

Our HoverflyPRO flight controller is firmly housed in the center of the multirotor. The flight controller is the brain of the copter. 

Ben, who constructed the copter himself, loosens the flight controller to have a better look inside the housing.

All wires and components seen below are strictly part of the flight system. The camera system is an entirely different unit, housed below the copter. 

Every wire, connector, bolt and screw matter.