The Scott Expedition – A Great Adventure from Studiocanoe on Vimeo.
43rumors readers Temujin sent me this video shot with the GX7 in Antarctica! And here is the text:
The GX7’s worked perfectly in Antarctica – as did my GH3. Here’s a quick overview video from the expedition. https://vimeo.com/87406935. The team sent back footage from the GX7’s via a custom made communications array – using the Iridium satellite system. The footage they sent back was reduced in quality to keep the file size down, but now I’m editing the raw files and we hope to make and finish a full documentary from the footage later this year.
Also – perhaps you will like this – https://vimeo.com/87651855. Shot with my GH3 and Panasonic lenses in Iceland over winter.
Nice work!
41 Responses
Wow. Incredible video.
Love the video! watched the second one
https://vimeo.com/87651855.
It’s so beautiful
Well, the Olympus works fine too. I’m currently overwintering in Antarctica (at the Concordia research station, check Wikipedia) and I’m rather happy of my E-M5. The main problem is the battery, when it becomes cold it dies very quickly, but this is was expected. After using the camera for a while below -50C the autofocus mechanism stops working, but well, that’s quite below the specs.
There are some aspects of the camera of which I’m disappointed. First of all there is no way to control the camera via USB (tethering). Why? It makes no sense in a modern camera of this range. The hardware is there, there is no reason not to include tethering support. If you don’t want to write the software just give out the specs, the libgphoto2 guys will add the support to their library. (I want it for time-lapse photography, but at -70C it’s not comfortable to stay near the camera to change the parameters. Of course I will build a heated box to protect the camera.)
The second thing is the AC-3 power adapter. You want to make an unreasonably expensive power supply so stupid people buy it? Well, do it, but please use a standard connector, so all the others will be happy!
Last but not least: Olympus please add focus peaking to this camera.
Wow, what are you doing out there?
You listed exactly my own negative critics to an otherwise nice camera, the E-M5. I can’t understand their product policy, but maybe European/American people can not understand Japanese companies.
For the AC adapter, you can convert an old battery as power supply. The only disadvantage is, that weather sealing is gone than, because of the cable.
I take care of a number of scientific projects during the Antarctic winter.
I know the camera trick, but before leaving I didn’t have time to experiment, I needed something that worked for sure and quickly, so I just bought the grip and the AC adapter. I think I will sell them once I get back.
I meant “the old battery trick”, not “the camera trick”…
“maybe European/American people can not understand Japanese companies.”
Nope. Still can’t. And I lived in Japan for awhile.
“First of all there is no way to control the camera via USB (tethering). Why?”
The market is too small for the feature. Everybody is moving toward network (Wi-Fi) tethering (not even bluetooth).
Otherwise, you can probably ask video people about it: remote control/etc is widely used for video, while for stills it is very limited.
But the feature is almost free to implement on such a camera: the usb interface is already there and the camera is already completely controlled by its software.
Hm… my Oly E-520 had support for USB tethering using the Olympus Viewer.
It seems that new Oly cameras/software do not support it.
Google up: olympus studio camera control via usb
Exactly and thats why it is so strange that they did not add this feature to the E-M5 or are not willing to change it.
Especially because the E-M5 was the MFT flagship model when it came out…
Just awesome – thanks for sharing – I have OMD-em5 and NEX5n and NEX7 and Fuji X100s and DSLR’s – I must say that the Panasonic GX7 is the most fun to use camera I have – I like it so much I bought two – one in silver and one black –
Just such an idea size and weight – and yes Sony NEX7 has a nice grip and IQ – but it has a terrible menu system and Tri Navi buttons to loose, no touch LCD and few Fn buttons –
So although NEX and now a6000 have a larger sensor they are no match for ease of use of the GX7 –
So yes if I was a full time Pro I would use also the OMD-em1 – and add the Sony a6000 for sports (although if I was doing serious sports a FF DSLR would be neeed )
But for street shooting and general shooting the GX7 is just a real pleasure to use and I think is very much underrated – I feel that Sony and Olympus and Fuji get more hype – but as I own also Sony and Olympus and Fuji I have a good comparison – Just like I think that Canon always gets more hype than Nikon and of course Pentax which also has very nice gear but is underestimated –
I think Olympus OMD and Panasonic GX7 have a real advantage over Sony and Fuji and that is in In Body Stabilization – Fuji has super nice prime lenses but none have IS – and of course Fuji has a nice camera body in the X-T1 – but like I said before to me the IBIS is more important than a bit larger sensor –
For example I get much sharper images out of my Fuji X20 ( has no AA filter ) than my Fuji X100s on the average unless there is very good lighting and I can shoot at 200th or higher – ( as the Fuji X100/s do not have iS period )
So Sony a6000 has the best fast motion focus followed by the Fuji X-T1 – but neither one has In Body Stabilization with their many primes with no IS –
Olympus OMD-5 and OMD10 and OMD1 are all superb cameras with 3 and 5 axis IBIS –
just the viewfinder hump just makes it harder to pocket and take out of a camera bag –
I also have the Olympus Stylus 1 which is a nice little all-around shooter but the large viewfinder hump makes it harder to put in pockets –
So this video showed how capable the GX7 really is
So you are seriously trying to tell us that unless you shoot at 1/200th or faster you cannot get a sharp shot with the Fuji 100s with its 35mm equivalent AOV lens LOL. I think Olympus fans spend way to much time wanking over their equipment which has induced a constant tremor. Image stabilization in still photography is one of if not the most exaggerated features in any digital camera.
Its utility is strictly limited to low light shooting of static subjects where no camera support is allowed.Moving subjects in low light it is useless, in reasonable light it is useless, if you use camera support { from a gorilla pod to leaning on a lamppost } IS serves no purpose, if you do not suffer from the “Olympus fanboy tremors” and like nearly everyone with even basic photo skills can comfortably shoot at the reciprocal shutter speed it is useless.
For the low light static subject shooters it is useful, I am just not sure that makes up much of the average persons shooting repertoire. It is also a compromise even in the few situations that it is helpful in. Take a shot with your IS on then take the same shot with a tripod and the visible difference you can clearly see is what IS does to the image. I think the reason whay so many Olympus fans go on and on and on about it are because they know just how bad the high ISO is in low light.
Not arguing the point that a tripod is better – but how often does one have the luxury to travel with a tripod and plop it down –
Also why do the manufacturers then have IS on their lenses if it is of very limited value including Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Sony etc.
I just seem to find it more practical to have IS in body rather then having to put it on every lens –
Yes I originally got the Fuji X100 (X100s later) which was touted to be so fantastic in low light – if only one could ever get that thing to focus –
I just happened to be in situations where there is not much light most of the time so very slow shutter speeds are the norm –
But you are right who needs IS, as you said not practical for much of the average persons shooting repertoire – and I assume you think AF is also useless –
Your problem with the 100s seemed to be your {not the cameras} inability to get a sharp shot under 1/200th of a second {almost 6 times the reciprocal of its effective focal length}.As for the benefit of IS as the focal length increases so does the reciprocal, thus making it more likely that IS will be of some help {though obviously not so much for moving subjects}.
Nikon and Canon DSLR shooters can if they so
desire have IS on lenses covering from 16-800mm { 1200mm on APS bodies} You however were complaining about it not being on primes most of which are pretty fast , the Fuji 56mm F1.2 is superb wide open and Fuji has at least a stop better high ISO than Mft so now you have to be shooting static subjects in super dim light to have any advantage with IS.
The mediocre AF of the 100s was well documented so it should not have come as a surprise. As for not needing IS , I certainly do not need it because I am incapable of getting a sharp shot on a 35mm AOV lens at 1/200th sec. IS of any kind is a utility in some very specific situations and either useless or even an impediment {compared to a tripod} in others.AF is however useful in many
situations though ironically enough the situations where it is most useful are exactly the situations in which all mirrorless cameras fall by the wayside namely fast C-AF and tracking. Lest you go
down the fanboy tirade route I have the E-M1 which is supposed to be the very best mirrorless camera for C-AF alas best c-AF for
mirrorlerss means distinctly average DSLR
You must have a technique problem as well as an IS mental block. I have some great shots in low light hand held in museums (and other no tripod places) that would be impossible without IS. However if I am chasing around after the GChildren, hand holding for half a second is a bit silly, ‘they just ain’t there any more’ when the button is pressed. That’s common sense is it not.
Tripods! You ever tried using a tripod with playing kids? that’s even worse. All it requires is a shift in technique, (that includes settings, lenses and even expectations). As for sports, many seem to make the EM1 work for sports quite well. Again try a technique change. Even if it is just a rapid single shot approach over a continual burst. The Oly AF is faster than most DSLRs and rapid single shot may achieve a better result than a DSLR would.
The scenario you talk about shooting in a museum , is exactly what I mentioned namely :
“Its utility is strictly limited to low light shooting of static subjects where no camera support is allowed.”
Even here every museum I have ever been in has their art illuminated in some way
Now just how much of your photography consists of ” low light handheld shots in museums” not a great deal I suspect. Your point about children supports my point, IS gives no help with moving subjects. Though it only seems to be mirrorless users who consider children to be a fast moving subject. Unless you are Usain Bolt’s grandpa , children are hardly a challenging subject.
The only area where mFT AF is faster than most DSLR’s is in exactly the area that doesn’t need it namely S-AF. Most P&S cameras are good enough at S-AF to get good results in most situations. The number of people shooting sports professionally with mFT are about the same as honest politicians. I have even seen an Olympus pro talk about using mFT gear with the humongous Olympus FT lenses lol , so you end up with much the same weight and a vastly inferior sensor.
You confirm what I said. Showing you have a block with IS. I have IBIS and its mostly On. I do use a tripod occasionally, but I am not going to carry one around just in case. I have IBIS for just in case.You also confirm SAF that’s why I said you have a technique problem, its related to what you ‘want to do’ not what you ‘need to do’. Make some changes and be satisfied.
IBIS should mostly be OFF, except where shutter speeds drop below a certain point, which depends on the lens’ focal length. For me, with my GX7, shooting with standard length primes (12mm to 42.5mm), it’s below 1/80th.
IBIS is not the panacea many wish to ascribe to it.
Like ABS brakes. They do nothing and are a waste of money! Correct?
“IBIS should mostly be OFF” on a tripod, yes. Other than that leave it on, that’s what its for.
IBIS can create distortion at higher shutter speeds, where it’s not necessary.
Many many things can create distortion. If I see it, I can fix it If I don’t, I won’t care. So please don’t worry on my behalf. 🙂
“”The Oly AF is faster than most DSLRs and rapid single shot may achieve a better result than a DSLR would.””
If the subject is static who cares if one system is a 1/1000th faster to focus. The challenge with AF is fast moving unpredictable subjects and sadly mFT sucks here, the E-M1 a wonderful camera in many ways sadly sucks in this area
Adding insult to injury, in their £1300 [ body only ] E-M1 flagship the managed to have even worse high ISO noise than other mFT bodies. Which are already behind even the cheapest Nikon or Sony bodies. Even the £220 [ with kit lens} A3000 has better high ISO than the best mFT. So you have to ask what matters most image quality or gadgets?
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Olympus-OM-D-E-M1-versus-Olympus-PEN-E-P5___909_883
I have no problem with ISO noise. But there again I don’t use high ISO as a matter of course. I grew up with film and with most cameras once the film was in the ISO was set.
If you have a problem with noise I suggest you try Topaz denoise. Follow it up with Topaz Clarity.
As for Dxo I am not interested. I don’t carry a laboratory round with me enveloping the camera and the shots taken. The output from such organisations is not really relevant to anything other than a test environment and has little to do with real life.
“Image stabilization in still photography is one of if not the most exaggerated features in any digital camera.”
It’s not when it comes to motion pictures though. I have to say, outside of video resolution gains and dynamic range, 5 axis stabilization is the most important motion picture technology development in the consumer camera market. It’s very important and impressive for videographers that know how to exploit that feature.
That’s wonderful even if the footage was reduced in quality because of bigs files. Can’t wait to see the final video. I have a GX7 and it’s a great video camera with his tiltable evf. If you like a GH3 but RF form, go GX7.
Ah? For all the OMD-EM5 users … get a new thread 🙂 This is about a video shot with the GX7 and GH3. The OMD-EM5 which Olympus should realistically sell at about $499 now because it’s at least a generation behind. Also note that this we are all looking at a Video which is something that Olympus is not really in the same league as any recent Panasonic cameras are. And no I have nothing against the EM-5 or the EM-1 they are great if all you care about is stills.
We all know this, so what’s the point of the post? argument?
Just to push Olympus to finally do something about their crappy video quality
Just because Olympus released two more recent cameras capable of images indistinguishable from that of the EM5 does not mean the EM5 is “at least a generation behind.” Unless the EM1 and EM10 are also “at least a generation behind.”
Do you really want to go over the EM5 specs and talk about what it’s missing vs more recent models? And yes Olympus video is awful. My main point though was that this blog post was about the GX7 and GH3 and how they were used to shoot *video. It’s strange to me that: 1. people seem to identify themselves as Olympus people not MFT people. 2. that these Olympus peeps are so defensive and try to argue away reality. 3. that they try to turn a post about video into yet another stills post.
wait untill i do my Scott version expedition. The E-M5 wont do fancy framerate options I admit, but there are no city or office lights there. Handheld it will be more flexible and sometimes superior. So it still has it benefits. Only thing; as I only had a preparation period of one month I am not sure I will return 🙁
Nice video. Pity they will have to go back and do it all again.
4K.
I’d hate to think about having to pay for sending video over the Iridium satellite system, it must be super expensive!
4k is NOT new. Been around for almost ten years. Panasonic is playing catch up in hopes to bring the prosumers to market. RED invented 4k, and many many previous productions have been mastered in 4k. In fact 4k is already behind the times. We shoot 6k and deliver in 4k.
Can you buy a RED 4K camera for $1700?
What exactly were the conditions under which the camera worked ‘fine?’
I’m asking things like, 12 hours at -40F? What were the extreme conditions under which we thought it noteworthy to mention that it survived Antarctica just fine, as opposed to say having survived Europe just fine, or North America just fine?
Ofcourse it would be Antartica as test location, otherwise it would make no sense. And I am sure they did not do the Scott route in 12 hours either :-), so its amazing for both the Panasonic & Ultrabooks which are actually just consumer products(maybe GH3 bit less). It would be even more impressive if they used more copies of one model like another team did with Olympys E-3 or 5 series plus multiple Canon 1d & Nikon D bodies. I remember one or two Canon bodies showed failures during that test.
No fun if you can’t make it back! I think you would unfortunately still have issues with the EM video codecs even without lights as. One issue people have are the frame rates but another altogether is that Olympus codecs generates mushy video. This problem you would’t get around even if you don’t have artificial light. The EM1 has improved over the EM5 (you would expect it to as it’s a more recent and flagship model) but it’s still not as good as for example the Panasonic GM1 and that’s a real shame. From an MFT perspective an Olympus answer to the GH3 in terms of video would already be a big step forward. Or a different kind of body that can shoot 1080p 🙂
inspirational video.