The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

GH2 impressions

kit laughlin

Subscriber Member
I'd be interested in hearing what you consider to be viable alternatives to the 7–14, MF notwithstanding, too. I was unaware of the CA problem too; I haven't seen any objectionable CA in net images, so far (and I use the 12–24/2.8 Nikkor for work, and am reasonably sensitive to this).

Size really matters these days in camera kits, too, in my experience. Since airlines here are strictly enforcing the 7Kg hand-luggage rule here, and needing to travel to locations for most of my work, I have had to rethink how I carry gear (I used to use two carry-ons for two bodies and 4–6 lenses); now I use a Pelican wheely and only carry one body (D3s) and one lens (24–70/2.8) so if the worst happens, I can still do something on location while they find the bag...

If I am shooting video, the HMC-152 (2.2Kg) gets carried and all the sound gear + tripod + hand-holding rig gets put into the hold.

The point of these observations is that I am watching µ4/3 developments very closely, for the same reasons as Jorgen and others. Personally, though, I am completely uninterested in the GH-2's video capabilities, for audio reasons only (plus a camera like the Panny HMC-152 has AF and MF with extensive aids, and is SO much easier to use for video than a DSLR, or µ4./3). While the big Nikons and Canons might be used occasionally by film/TV crews to record the video, they shoot second system (separate sound recording on expensive digital recorders) and that aspect alone would double the size of my crew.
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
I'd be interested in hearing what you consider to be viable alternatives to the 7–14, MF notwithstanding, too. I was unaware of the CA problem too; I haven't seen any objectionable CA in net images, so far (and I use the 12–24/2.8 Nikkor for work, and am reasonably sensitive to this).

Size really matters these days in camera kits, too, in my experience. Since airlines here are strictly enforcing the 7Kg hand-luggage rule here, and needing to travel to locations for most of my work, I have had to rethink how I carry gear (I used to use two carry-ons for two bodies and 4–6 lenses); now I use a Pelican wheely and only carry one body (D3s) and one lens (24–70/2.8) so if the worst happens, I can still do something on location while they find the bag...

If I am shooting video, the HMC-152 (2.2Kg) gets carried and all the sound gear + tripod + hand-holding rig gets put into the hold.

The point of these observations is that I am watching µ4/3 developments very closely, for the same reasons as Jorgen and others. Personally, though, I am completely uninterested in the GH-2's video capabilities, for audio reasons only (plus a camera like the Panny HMC-152 has AF and MF with extensive aids, and is SO much easier to use for video than a DSLR, or µ4./3). While the big Nikons and Canons might be used occasionally by film/TV crews to record the video, they shoot second system (separate sound recording on expensive digital recorders) and that aspect alone would double the size of my crew.
WRT airline weight restrictions I only can second here. These have really become frustrating! Some years ago nobody really cared how much weight you brought on board, now it is sometimes restricted to 1 bag below 8kg. Now do that this a Hasselblad and 2 or 3 lenses. Or with a Nikon, even with my small D700 and my 3 zooms from 12-200 range. No way, you are above the 8kg. Plus then you still do not have a computer in your bag. I especially ran into these restrictions in the US, not so much in Europe. Because in the US, if they are strict, they even limit this for the Business passengers, so even upgrading does not help.

Here the M43 comes nicely into play. A whole kit with GH2, 14-140, 100-300 and 7-14 is sure below 4kg. So you can add another 2kg for MacBook Pro and still have some 2kg left.

I must say I also do not too much video with my cameras, so I simply do not care too much. Because I rather try to concentrate on one thing and in my case this is photography. I think if you mix both, then - at least in my case - quality degrades. But it is nice to have video and even if I use it just for fun it is great. Sure, any dedicated video camera should be better than a DSLR, no question.
 

Terry

New member
Peter,
I fly all the time in the US. I've never on a domestic flight had them weigh carry on bags. They will look at size and number but not weight. WRT international flights it is a different story. However, again on US carriers I have not seen them weigh the carry on. The London airports have given people a lot of problems and I know for a while the US Canada flights were a problem. When I went to Iceland I pretended my carry-on Kiboko bag was really light and it was anything but light.
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Peter,
I fly all the time in the US. I've never on a domestic flight had them weigh carry on bags. They will look at size and number but not weight. WRT international flights it is a different story. However, again on US carriers I have not seen them weigh the carry on. The London airports have given people a lot of problems and I know for a while the US Canada flights were a problem. When I went to Iceland I pretended my carry-on Kiboko bag was really light and it was anything but light.
It happened to me last year in Seattle - flying LH Business Class back to Munich - I had 2 bags and had to check one in because only 1 bag is allowed officially and the carry on bag had to be less than 8kg - so I needed to put some of my stuff from this bag into the check in bag to make it lighter. You can imagine I was really ......

It also happened to some friends as well. I first also did not believe it, till I went through it in person.

I must say it is not the rule that this happens, but it can be. So issue then is - what do you do, if you have some 20kg of expensive gear with you and need to reload and check in 12kg of it. You never know when they are sticking to the rules, this is the bad side of the game.
 

Terry

New member
There is one answer. You need to wear a photo vest. If you see that they are weighing and making people check bags you need to offload as much into the vest pockets as possible. Luminous Lanscape has a number of articles detailing this.

Again, you saw this happen with Lufthansa, the US carriers (in normal times - not right after a terror problem) do not enforce a carry on weight limit.
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
There is one answer. You need to wear a photo vest. If you see that they are weighing and making people check bags you need to offload as much into the vest pockets as possible. Luminous Lanscape has a number of articles detailing this.

Again, you saw this happen with Lufthansa, the US carriers (in normal times - not right after a terror problem) do not enforce a carry on weight limit.
A photo vest is a great idea, thanks, will do that!

There is hope that these situations do not occur too often ;)
 
B

Berndimax

Guest
Well the cameras with bigger sensors produce footage that is superior in almost every way! Astoundingly less noise. Dumbstoundingly more dynamic range. Better color, you name it. In every test the GH1/GH2 looses out. So why buy a GH1/2 if you're interested in video? Well there are ONLY two reasons! One is price! The now $200 GH1 puts "good enough" professional video in the hands of just about any indy film-maker. The second reason is the shallow depth of the M4/3 mount flange. This allows the placement of adapted professional video lenses at the same distance from the GH1/2's sensor as the original professional film cameras and the Lumix series lenses at nearly the same distance as those. This helps a lot in getting the footage to look and feel like such film cameras - and this very desirable. It allows us to actually use exactly the same lenses - again very desirable! The Canons and Nikons (etc.) cannon accept such lenses at all.

But again if we examine and compare the video footage itself, the GH series loses out in every respect - in a very dramatic and obvious way too! This isn't my opinion, this is measurable and demonstrable fact with literally thousands of hours online proving this beyond any doubts. If I had my wish the GH1/2 would be the best - as obviously I own the GH1. :)

Here is about 1.5 hours of just such footage: http://www.zacuto.com/shootout have a look and then let's discuss it if you'd like. The Zacuto Shootout is probably the best and most fair comparison available on-line. It's really worth watching!



PS: in your response you said the "Nikons and Canons" have better lenses... This is not really true as we have all the lenses - theirs and ours - and movie lenses! Professional videographers do not typically use or want to use autofocusing so we can discard that right off the bat. ;) So in this regard as I explained above the GH series cameras wins. It's one of the only two aspects that the GH series do win.
Hello, this statement made my to register here to tell you my experience with Canon 550d and GH1/13/2 regarding video quality.
Three years ago I started shooting a documentary about a huge building project in the center of my hometown in Austria.
It was impossible to use a big camera on this site, so I shot with my old Canon HV10 and a Lumix LX2 for stills. But the HV10 had no wide angle and no good lowlight performance. Then I bouhgt a 550d when it came out, cause I wanted to give my shots a cinematic look with a shallow depth of field on close ups. Also I wanted to use only one camera for video and stills.
Then the surprise: I was shocked by the footage the 550d delivered. To me it looked like upscaled SD and was full of artifacts and moire. Nearly every third shot was unusable. First I tried to work around the artifacts by throwing critical areas out of focus and used softening filters. But this made the footage even softer. I had to use two cameras again: 550d for close ups and lowlight and a Powershot SX1 (more detail and far less moire) for wide angle shots. Even a Casio EXF1 upscaled from 720p looked more detailed than the 550d at 1080p. I was more than unhappy.
Then I decided to by a GH1 and hacked it. The best decision I ever made.
Now I could use only one camera again. For close ups with shallow DOF, acceptable lowlight, wide angle shots with nearly no moire and stills.
Now I have a GH2 as well and see some improvements: lowlight (no vertical banding), little more detail and the ETC mode.
As for lowlight performance of the GH2 look at slashcam.de: They http://www.slashcam.de/artikel/Test/Panasonic-GH2-vs-Canon-EOS-60D-vs-Nikon-D7000-Lowlightvergleich.html tested it against a 60d and a d7000.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
There is one answer. You need to wear a photo vest. If you see that they are weighing and making people check bags you need to offload as much into the vest pockets as possible. Luminous Lanscape has a number of articles detailing this.

Again, you saw this happen with Lufthansa, the US carriers (in normal times - not right after a terror problem) do not enforce a carry on weight limit.
Photo vest or not, this situation is not going to improve, and makes m43 an even better deal. Here in Asia, they routinely weigh the carry on luggage, and checked in luggage is in no way safe if there's anything of value inside. A couple of years ago, I used to fill up my Think Tank Airport Addicted to the brim with cameras, lenses and even strobes, pretending that the 25+ kilograms were a fifth or so of what it really was. Now, I only use lightweight gear, and my bag is so small that they just laugh when I ask if they want me to put it on the scale, while the business crowd with their armoured little three-day bags are stopped all the time.
 

Terry

New member
My 100-300 was waiting for me when I arrived home last night. Very positively surprised on size/weight. Yeah!
 
I promise not to highjack this thread as talking about flying to Kenya is much more interesting than my question. I have a couple of G1's and would value the improved ASA performance of the GH2.

Are these specs from the Panasonic site correct? I say that as the GH2 is 68% deeper and only weighs 2% more.

G1.................................GH2

Weight 385......................392

Width 124.......................124

Height 83.6.......................89.6

Depth 45.2.......................75.8

Just back from Laos where I shot 2165 frames with my G1. I'll post a few when I finish my culling.

Thanks in advance.

Tony
London UK
 

Terry

New member
Sounds like your G1 spec is with no lens and the other includes a lens. They are essentially the same size cameras.

I already veered the thread off-topic from peters review.
 
Thanks TEB,

Both came from the Panasonic site - but I take your word for it.

An odd mistake to make - but once made it will stick as all the reviews will simply copy the 'official' specs.

Tony
 

Jonas

Active member
Well the cameras with bigger sensors produce footage that is superior in almost every way!
(...)
Here is about 1.5 hours of just such footage: http://www.zacuto.com/shootout have a look and then let's discuss it if you'd like. The Zacuto Shootout is probably the best and most fair comparison available on-line. It's really worth watching!
(...)
That's some interesting reality check. Gotta low the DR in the film clips.

(...) No one will be saying to themselves: 'Oh look, that camera is 9mm narrower and 6mm shorter so I don't need to be nervous'. (...)
...and again more of the same thing.
I agree that a one man band, a photo journalist and everyone wanting a dual function but relatively competent camera can like the GHx though.

Cheers,

Jonas
 

lcubed

New member
When the two cameras are in their factory states respectively the GH2's video is better. Yes the difference is noticeable but you have to know what you're looking for.

When the GH1 is properly hacked then the GH1's video is better than the GH2's. And again yes, the differences are noticeable but you have to know what to look for - or you have to be able to identify what you're looking at. The quality increase is almost a perfect leapfrog: GH1 --> GH2 --> GH1+mod with close to equal differences linearly. That's with "safe" settings and if you wish to purchase a speedy memory card and push the envelope with the PTool's settings for the custom firmware then the GH1+mod gets even better.

If someone is considering the GH cameras just for video quality and they don't mind patching the firmware then the GH1 is the best one still - by far actually.

However, for the casual home movie buff who just wants to film their kid's kindergarden play, a high school graduation, or record clips from their vacation it doesn't really matter. If you're not professionally minded about video and don't edit with broadcast, duplication mastering, you will likely not be able to tell the difference between the GH1, the GH2, and the patched GH1 - if if you can, it just won't matter to you. The differences to an untrained eye are very slight.

But also to note that if a professional wishes the best quality and needs/wants to use a DSLR then both the top Nikon and Canon DSLRs produce better quality footage than any of the Panasonic M4/3 products - including the GH1, GH2, GH1+mod and the new AG-AF100 dedicated video camera.

The deal here is the price and the lenses. While the Nikon and the Canon both produce better video IQ they also cost (now) 5 or 6 times the price and cannot accept nearly as many alt lenses as can be fitted to the M4/3 mount.
There's at least one review that seems to have a different opinion on a number of your talking points.

http://www.eoshd.com/content/465-Canon-60D-versus-Panasonic-GH2-Full-Review-Part-2
 

Jonas

Active member
I know very little about video and video gear and reviews of video gear. I read the review you linked us to earlier and I wasn't impressed. I think parts of the text really are questionable.
My question here; is eoshd.com known to be a quality review site, or is it perhaps known to be a so-so place? Or is it the same as with still photography that you need to read several reviews to get nearly the whole picture?

thanks,

Jonas
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
After reading a few reviews and comparisons of the video capabilities of different candidates, my impression is that the results go in all different directions. I have a feeling that it's partly a question of what people are looking for. Review parameters for video don't seem to be nearly as well defined as those for photo, maybe because most still camera review sites are looking towards dpreview when they set their standards. Although the reviews at dpreview are often more or less irrelevant to my photography, they have made a very elaborate routine, and apart from real life photography (disregarding the snapshots that accompany their reviews), it's rather complete. I haven't found anything nearly as good when it comes to video.
 

MRfanny

New member
i'm with the latter, read more.

agreed, there isn't a benchmark that everyone on the web uses to test video.

the gh1 video wise is crippled because of its "AVCHDlite" codec and not sensor size in my opinion. There have been many canon 5d 7d users who switch to the gh because of that "filmic" look....i'm guessing not super clean that it almost appears fake look. It also doesn't suffer from overheating, recording limit, and does a better job at avoiding moire. It comes down to a matter of personal taste really. In the first zacuto clip you can see the amazement from the industry pro's as to what this little sucker can do (unhacked too). Of course it has its weaknesses like DR (the gh1 chart was all unfocused, crocked and looked liked it was thrown in last minute..ha) and FPN.

The gh2 has a better codec that now includes B frames though still not true pro AVCHD (maybe the AF100 has that) and still suffers from shadow artifacts from what i have seen but it does have hdmi out which can possibly give the option to record onto a separate recorder whatever uncompressed codec you like. That is slowly being nutted out and fine tuned by users. They finally addressed the FPN in low light, high iso, and underexposed areas too which was what ever gh1 owner was hoping for. Though there is a strange single line horizontal blue band that sometimes appears in very high iso and changes position based on frame rate but being able to capture decent image at 3200iso, its a minor flaw. The cleaner image in low light high iso is enough reason for me to upgrade, ill still be keeping my gh1 though=)

Something interesting is the gh1 iso's is alot brighter than the gh2 if you compare the two side by side.

I have a friend that works in tv and he hates it when they decide to shoot with the 5d, could be workflow or just dslr in general, i should ask him why =)
 
Last edited:

ustein

Contributing Editor
>he gh1 video wise is crippled because of its "AVCHDlite" codec and not sensor size in my opinion.

It is AVCHD and not lite (lite is for 720p in other cameras). It is crippled by:

a) low bit rate
b) no B-Frames
c) GH2 uses better encoder
 

Jonas

Active member
After reading a few reviews ... dpreview ... irrelevant to my photography...
Thank you. So I've better check more reviews, just as with still cameras then.
There are certainly not many of all the pages DPR presents with each review that are of interest to me. Checking noise levels at very good light and at small 100% crops are for example pretty much meaningless. Fining outhow the camera handles in real life is also not easy.

i'm with the latter, read more.
(...) In the first zacuto clip you can see the amazement from the industry pro's as to what this little sucker can do (unhacked too). Of course it has its weaknesses like DR (the gh1 chart was all unfocused, crocked and looked liked it was thrown in last minute..ha) and FPN.
(...)
Something interesting is the gh1 iso's is alot brighter than the gh2 if you compare the two side by side.
OK, I'll read more.
The Zacuto clips; the bathroom scene, maybe from part 3?, showed very well that the GH1 had the worst DR of all the tested cameras. The big jump was between film and digital though.
From what I have seen (untrained eyes though) this far the differences between the GH1 and the GH2 aren't that big. I'll have to go back re-check some samples. The high ISO noise speaks for the GH2 though as I really dislike banding.

Thank you,

/Jonas
 

NigelC

Member
I've come to the conclusion I would benefit from something in between my 5D11 and Panny LX3. This would be particlarly for travel photography and wilderness hiking, when the 5D and lenses are getting a bit heavy (well camera is same weight but feels more to my ailing discs!). LX3 capable of surprising quality on latrge prints and 24mm and F2 is great, but limited useable ISO range and 60mm top end excludes a lot of possibilities

GH2 seems to fit the bill - no APC camera offers appreciable wieght bulk saving over 5D. But I'm struggling with lens selection. I don't want another system, just coverage form 24/28 to 200 ideally, with reasonable close focussing. In the UK, only sold with 14-42 or 14-140; latter seems a bit bulky when discretiuon is the key but there seems no alternative 2 lens option as the 14-42 does not seem to do sensor justice, so can't see any alternative - would be nice to have 20mm pancake for when zoomn is just not discrete enough.
 
Top