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

Terry

New member
This particular sub-forum is where you want to be if you want to be convinced to buy the newest Panasonic gear though. ;) This is the most pana-positive crowd I've run into on-line so far. ;) They even like what most others think is low grade, mediocre, and/or over priced. :D It's all good tho. It takes all kinds of folks to make the world go round and I'm all for that - but just a heads up as to where you are. And I'm not saying it's a bad place to be either. :) I haven't read the other sub-forums enough yet to know if this is the case for the entire site or just this sub-forum though I suspect it's only us M4/3'ers. If nothing else the positivity keeps us enthused about our hobby and purchase decisions! :thumbs: I think it's not an ideal place for critical objective equipment analysis tho. Of course, few are...
Tesselator - you've come on to this scene with a very aggressive attitude about the gear and many of the people here. Spend some time on the other areas of the forum and you will see people that use all sorts of different gear and have gear from all different brands and as said, they use it! Look at all the threads of pictures the many talented members here are creating every day. Of all of the photo places on the web that I've frequented, this is one of the most brand agnostic places around. People buy what is working for them. If it stops working or something more interesting comes along they move on. It is one of the few places where people can have an in depth discussion without it going off track and causing bickering and that is from the very active involvement of the moderators. For instance if you go to the Sony sub forum you will find plenty of people that started in mirrorless with m4/3. Look at the K5 thread and ask what brand their last camera was. There are plenty of critical gear discussions on this forum, you just haven't explored enough to find them. In addition there is a wealth of information in the threads as well. In closing, ease up.
 

kwalsh

New member
You know Tesselator, while you don't have a brand-name to preach the constant "my manual focus, legacy, used prime lenses are a better price point than your auto focus, native, zoom lenses" refrain is just a brandless form of fanboyism. If you'd read this forum in its whole I think you'd find most of the members here use a wide range of equipment and are very familiar with the concept of different tools for different jobs each with different sets of benefits and limitations. The only one with an apparent ax to grind is you. We keep hearing the same completely out of context comparisons coated with a thick layer of hyperbole. A fisheye prime compared to a rectilinear zoom?

Ken
 

biglouis

Well-known member
I do know where I am LOL--been here for over 2 years. I'm asking for ongoing impressions as people continue to shoot with it. Some people have immediate impressions based on what they are looking for specifically, others have impressions or opinions that build as they shoot with a camera. I thihk its a pretty new camera for "writ in stone" impressions quite yet. So--I hope people will continue to discuss their experiences shooting with the camera, pro and con..
Going back to the original purpose of the thread. These are my impressions. I believe you own a GF-1, which is where I am coming from. Love the GF-1 but it does reach its limits above iso800, imho, although I have produced good results at iso1600 but only with very careful post-processing and nothing I would be happy enlarging bigger than 8x10 at the most.

Purchasing the 100-300 before Xmas really did expose the limits of the GF-1 even further, especially in low light - which you get a lot of in the UK at this time of the year :)

It is also interesting to note that I won a reasonably pretigious photographic competition with a photograph from my GF-1 and PL 45/2.8. So, I'm not complaining - just outgrown the body.

OK, well I've been slow at giving my impressions because I've been really waiting for the weather to get better so I feel inspired to take pictures. The short time I have used the GH-2 I can report:

- Beautifully made (but so is the GF-1)
- Screen is fantastic (better than the GF-1)
- Viewfinder is outstanding. Bright, clear, full of information. I don't know what it is like on the GH1 but if this is the state of the art for EVF then the optical viewfind is dead, imho. It's like looking through an optical viewfinder but you can see the impact of adjusting your EV compensation. What could be better?
- Speed autofocus: very fast, much much faster than the GF-1 with my 20/1.7
- Speed capture: for this type of camera? Nothing short of amazing. Have to be careful not to put it onto burst mode or it just bangs away and you've suddenly captured half a dozen frames
- Results: not sure. Definitely better than the GF-1 but exactly how much? Does it even matter? If, like me you've reached the limits of what a GF-1 can do then I can definitely state the GH-2 does it better.
- Features: still working out how to use the touch screen. Was expecting it to be a help with street shooting but not entirely convinced - again, may find with more use it turns out to be either indispensible or a waste of time. An ariculated screen is definitely a bonus over the fixed screen of the GF-1 but then is that a fair comparison?
- Ergonomics - much easier to hand hold than the GF-1. Found myself holding it by the grip down at my side with the 100-300 on it - which I wouldn't dare do with the GF-1 for fear of dropping it. A lot more like a DSLR than a P&S in that respect.
- Noise - don't know why but I think the shutter is quieter and smoother than the GF-1.

I wish I could give you a list of negatives but until I do a proper analysis of captures, I am going to find this hard to do. I'd like to go back and test of the camera against a subject I used about 18 months ago when I was evaluation a D700 with the 24/2.8 against my M8 with the 28/2.8. In that case the M8 won only by a small margin and then on microcontrast which would be unperceptible for most purposes. If I do conduct a similar test then I can post all three samples, D700-M8-GH2.

Hope that helps

LouisB
 
H

hawaiigent

Guest
I am glad to read all user impressions of the GH 2, thanks much. I got mine w the 14-2 only last week, but already having a great fun time with it. Panasonic has thrown everything into this model and it seems a useful and improved successor to my G-1. Complex enough re adjustments and personalizing, --- for almost any temperament. Yes, a 208! page manual and Panasonic throws in full hard copy Spanish etc versions.
I kind of miss having the right finger front wheel but I think that will be something I will get used to. I had read, year ago, a quick draw view that these cameras were at once too plasticky and would die on the trail. Didn't happen to my G-1. I can live with those who sniff at any micro or 4/3 product. There is still a camp that won't accept anything from Olympus or Panasonic. Okeedokee...so buy a Pentax,and enjoy life.
Sure we know, It is on line sport,...Has nothing to do with picture making still or video and raises no hackles.
BTW,Has anyone seen photos of the thousand buck German made video "cage" rail set up for the GH-2...
Someone must have adopted the GH 2 for such fancy accessorizing layoug.
Check it on the EOSHD forum when you get time.

http://www.eoshd.com/content/507-Panasonic-GH2-goes-pro-exploring-the-ReWo-GH2-cage-Part-1
Aloha,
Gerry
 
Last edited:

henningw

Member
Daine,

I had a GF1, a G2 and now a GH2. Yes I switched around a bit and made the GF1-G2 switch due to always wanting the viewfinder and preferring the grip on the G2 to the flatter GF1. My thoughts are that the GH2 does have a nice step up in the image quality in stills over the G2. Higher ISO performace is more usable. I would not use over ISO 400 on the G2, but feel I can use even 1200 on the GH2. I would not do that for images I plan on printing large, but it is there for smaller sizes. I also feel there is a bit more dynamic range on the GH2. So overall, I am very happy with it. I have to admit that I have not taken a ton of images with the GH2, but with those that I did, I am very happy with what it produces.

I should add that autofocus is vastly improved over the GF1 and G2. Very usable. Also the EVF is even better. Lastly, the touchscreen is actually quite cool if you are on a tripod and doing macro work. Very nice for picking your focus point. That is the same as in the G2, but you are comparing to a G1, so that feature would be new to you.

Cliff
Those are my general impressions as well, but I like the GF-1 well enough to keep it. I have the G1 and GF-1 and now the GH2. The GH2 is definitely a step up in image quality; DR is better and RAW files are more 'resilient', ie, you can go a bit further in trying to pull things out of the shadows or separate channels. The viewfinder refresh is a lot faster (2x) and the AF is also snappier and works as well as many APS-C DSLRs'. For similar image quality, I can go one to two stops higher, and ISO 3200 is quite useable if Tri-X in straight D76 was OK for you. I have no problems with 1600 under most conditions, and I will readily use it. I do not use it for pictures I would otherwise use my large format stuff for, but then I don't have any digitals that can do that job.

I also have a Canon 5DII that I use with specific lenses like the TSE's, some fast primes and teles but I now use it more like I used to use MF with film, and use the m4/3 cameras like I used to use 35mm SLR's with film. I've largely given up using lenses wider than 35mm on the Canon unless it's the 17 or 24 TSE. The optical quality of the Panasonic m4/3 7-14 is such that on the GH2 it puts the output of the Canon 5DII and 16-35 to shame, except in special circumstances.

When I don't need SLR type features I use M8's and 9 preferentially with wider and faster lenses. I sometimes use the M's in conjunction with the M4/3's, with the latter for tele and macro. The image quality is not really comparable, but neither is that of the Canon. Still, it works for me.

Henning
 

Diane B

New member
Wow, those posts above are just what I was hoping to read. You gave information relative to cameras I know--the GF1, the G1 and the 5DII (though I shoot with the 5D). Having slogged my way through many Canons from D30 (and an Oly E10 and Canon G1 and G9 thrown in there) to the 5D, I added the m4/3 a bit over 2 years ago. I do rather feel its time to move up from the G1 and GF1 with better bodies available but am not in a hurry thinking there's more coming this year but do have my eye on the GH2. Since its not generally shipping anyhow I keep reading and always prefer real live shooting input from people using the camera. Thanks so much.

Diane
 

Rich M

Member
I kind of miss having the right finger front wheel but I think that will be something I will get used to.
Gerry.....I think you will absolutely grow to love the rear thumbwheel on the GH2. It mirrors the configuration of the GF1, which when using manual focus lenses enables the magnified EVF view with a single push.

Much nicer that the double button dance on the other G's.

(Little things like that make me happy.....)

R
 

Tesselator

New member
Boy, you guys sure put a lot of meanings into my words that weren't there.

But I'll shut-up just the same. It's all good. :)

Sorry if I caused any hostilities...
 
H

hawaiigent

Guest
Someone wrote that the GH 2 had such a good implementation of the adjustable Program Mode that it almost made sense to use that most of the time. Was wondering if experienced users chose P mode, or is that too oversimplified an approach?
Another question , sort of, not a big puzzler just something on the old mind. I have two so called kit lenses now, the 14-45 and the 14-42 which came with the G-1. I like the stainless steel mount face of the 14-45. Do you think there might be some difference in implementation of auto focus by Panasonic on the 14-42 that I didn't catch in the literature? Yes, I will test them both but I plan to plop the 14-42 onto the G-1 and return it to my spouse whom I originally bought it for but glommed on to it.
I am also checking out the 4/3 lenses I own, the 50mm, the 12-60 and the 50-200mm SWD on the GH 2. I do get some AF, in a herky jerky fashion. I didn't actually expect any compatibility with the contrast detection mode, so that is interesting. The 50-200 is a big one but it would be on a monopod. I have not urge to get a FD to micro 4/3 adapter after a brief flirtation with a Chinese made adapter. Too klutzy. If Novoflex can come down by a hundred USD I would get one of their machined gems, we will see...
All in all, a pleasant fun machine, and going to be a lot of fun. And with video HD capability a blast indeed. ( PS. I have a presence on photo.net four thirds and most of my pictures will be there. You understand. So many forums, so little time and all..) gs
 

lcubed

New member
i would love to hear your experience on the 12-60 with the GH2.
I did play with that combo for a whole five minutes in a camera store in the bay area,
so it does work with contrast AF.
 

CPWarner

Member
I have not urge to get a FD to micro 4/3 adapter after a brief flirtation with a Chinese made adapter. Too klutzy. If Novoflex can come down by a hundred USD I would get one of their machined gems, we will see...
Fotodiox makes a much more reasonably price FD to m4/3 adapter that is well built and reasonably priced. Go here: fotodiox I have two of these and they are good quality and reasonable at ~$40 + $5 shipping.

Cliff
 
B

boyzo

Guest
Pana AU is a joke in terms of pricing though it doesn't seem as bad this time round. They haven't even bothered listing it on their lumix site. $1500 at teds with lens, i think they are over valuing the lens combo =) guess its better than the 3k that they were asking for when the gh1 came out.

Fingers crossed there is a patch soon after firmware release to switch from nstc to pal so i can pick one up from the US.
Pany AU pricing
well known here as a Joke
The GH1 3K well the G1/14/45 was $1500 originally and the GF1/20mm was $1500
 

photoSmart42

New member
Fotodiox makes a much more reasonably price FD to m4/3 adapter that is well built and reasonably priced. Go here: fotodiox I have two of these and they are good quality and reasonable at ~$40 + $5 shipping.

Cliff
FWIW, the issue with the cheap adapters is infinity focus. To be precise, the cheaper adapters are designed to go slightly beyond infinity to make sure they can substantiate their infinity focus guarantee. While that sounds like a good idea, it's actually not and I ran into issues a few times. With lenses where a slight turn means the difference between in-focus and out-of-focus depending on how close to the infinity mark you are, not being able to depend on the focus being 100% accurate when you set the lens on that infinity mark means a bunch of discarded photos.

If I were decided to stick with the m4/3 format, I'd invest in a heart beat in the Novolfex adapter if it guarantees that infinity means infinity, and not beyond.
 

slau

New member
After using the GH2 for over one week and on couple shootings, I think that I made the right decision to buy the GH2.

I have been quite happy using my G1 and hacked GH1. Most of the time I used my Panasonic M4/3 in conjunction with my Canon 1 series gears. A lot of time shot both system side-by-side. While I used my Panasonic mostly for video, I did use it for stills too.

So far, I am quite impressed with the 24H video quality of my GH2. Addition features like the audio monitoring bar, three custom settings, function buttons, one click focus assistance with the wheel (with non Panasonic lens), nicer EVF, ETC, etc, make shooting with the GH2 much more enjoyable and with more confidence. I haven't found anything that bothers me yet, while there must be more goodies waiting for me to find out.

I believe that the GH2 helps me to settle down more on the Panasonic M4/3 system, and makes my decision to go for the Voigtlander 25f0.95 much easier. Tomorrow I will pick up my 100-300 lens and I will almost complete my M4/3 system. Finally, I think it is about time for me to set up a gallery for the Panasonic M/43 system: http://www.pbase.com/stephenl/panasonic_g1
 

CPWarner

Member
FWIW, the issue with the cheap adapters is infinity focus. To be precise, the cheaper adapters are designed to go slightly beyond infinity to make sure they can substantiate their infinity focus guarantee. While that sounds like a good idea, it's actually not and I ran into issues a few times. With lenses where a slight turn means the difference between in-focus and out-of-focus depending on how close to the infinity mark you are, not being able to depend on the focus being 100% accurate when you set the lens on that infinity mark means a bunch of discarded photos.

If I were decided to stick with the m4/3 format, I'd invest in a heart beat in the Novolfex adapter if it guarantees that infinity means infinity, and not beyond.
I guess I have not had a problem with "to infinity and beyond" :D

One of my adapters is used on a FD 200mm Macro, so I am virtually never at infinity. The other one is on a FD 300mm F4,and again I use it primarily for hummingbirds and am typically near the close focus distance. So I guess I have not had this issue. Clearly, the demands of the user will dictate if an inexpensive adapter is good enough. If mine were off, they would be a piece of cake to shim, so I would probably go there first rather than shell out hundreds for the Novaflex adapter.

Cliff
 
H

hawaiigent

Guest
Fotodiox makes a much more reasonably price FD to m4/3 adapter that is well built and reasonably priced. Go here: fotodiox I have two of these and they are good quality and reasonable at ~$40 + $5 shipping.

Cliff
Yes, CP, I know many folk have used these successfully and I applaud that.
So what happened to m? I ordered and tried a Fotodiox adapter. After a week trying it on all of my FD lenses I just sent it back.
All I can report is that my sample of the adapter would not go on and off with any reliable feel. It actually felt stuck on at times... I had trouble lining up the slot for sure. Or getting the ring on top to move and stay put and not slide around to off position.
I am an impatient sort I suppose. I want to hear a click and a solid click..
Or else I got a bum unit made on a Monday during Tet :confused:. I know there is more than one China and other country maker out there, and I have not tried them all.
OK, what about the value of buying a Novoflex even at two bills and using it with my nice clean FD 50mm 1.4? Well, what do I gain over using my ED 50mm F 2 and I lose f stop control. See what I mean. My FD 100 mm F 2.8 is not going to give me more than my ED 12-60mm. I may be missing something of course, still open to a try on one day with Novoflex if they go on sale, not likely of course, unless Euro tanks.
I would love to have the viable option of employing old lenses, even other brands, and even my wonderful beloved FD 200mm F 2.8.( But it won't do more for me than the 50-200 mm SWD.)
So, Novoflex nor Fotodiox wins no cigar for me personally. For others starting out w micro four thirds, sure, it gives one a battery of prime lenses missing in the lineup. Until one decides to get the full automation treatment if that is important to one.
A personal experience which I know is a minority one.
FD lenses for me had their day and it was a great one. I will still keep them for my Canon T90. And old friend, that baby still one of the all time wonders..:)
 

CPWarner

Member
Interesting. The problems you mention hawaiigent are what I had with a cheapo adapter from China that I got free with a lens I bought. I have not had these issues with my Fotodiox adapters. Sorry to hear yours did not work out.

Sure, why would you bother with a FD 50mm f/1.4? The only lenses I was interested in adapting were the longer telephoto ones, 200mm macro and 300mm f/4 (along with a 2x if really long reach is needed). If you have the ED lenses, I agree that there are better adapters and options. In no way was I saying that FD lenses are a mainstay, I use a series of m4/3 lenses that I like with AF, OIS, and auto aperture. There are places where I find that a FD or other legacy lens can be useful. In those limited cases the less expensive adapters fit my needs. What I am very eager to see is one of the m4/3 consortium to make more fast fixed focal length lenses with exceptional quality. Possibly Voightlander will either do this or push Panasonic and Olympus to up their game.

Cliff
 

henningw

Member
I just looked at the latest Luminous-Landscape article in which DXO ratings are used as the basis for a discussion of image quality progress. I noted that the GH1 is rated higher than the GH2. In fact, the GH1 sensor is rated as being quite close to that of the Leica M9.

Now I have, or rather have had all these cameras. I don't have the GH1 anymore. I got rid of it shortly after acquiring the GH2, as the GH2 clearly gave better results, with lower noise levels especially at higher ISO's and a greater dynamic range. And yet, DXO gives the GH1 higher marks in these areas, or at least about the same.

I also fail to see how the GH1 is give a score very close to that of the M9, which in my eyes has a hugely better output than the m4/3 cameras.

This makes me distrust the DXO ratings even more. For many pairs of cameras, their scores seem to describe the differences correctly, but for the above 3 cameras they seem to be wide adrift of experience.

Henning
 
Top