PDA

View Full Version : GH2 Is the hacked Gh2 seriously not blowing people away!!?



L1N3ARX
11-12-2011, 01:27 PM
Since I got this camera a few weeks ago, I feel as if I have this secret weapon that nobody knows about. Talking within the "cinema" realm of planned / scripted shots, where achieving the "cinema" look is definitely on your short list, this camera is absolutely unreal. I showed a couple friends and family who are film buffs raw footage with a Sigma 30mm 1.4 and 176bit hack, and they thought they were actually looking something shot on film stock. I am so oddly satisfied by the GH2, that I find myself smirking when I see people spending 5-10k on higher priced cameras and arguing which one looks more like film (totally subjective of course). I can't help it, this camera is just too good, and it's not even a price thing, I could see myself trying to buy this camera at around 5k if I saw what I'm shooting now. Obviously, the right tool for the right job, and many people need a real camera and not a picture camera that makes amazing video, but seriously... after seeing some of this footage.. good lord. You'd almost think people would be chomping at the bit, to get close to what this camera is doing now that it's hacked. Maybe I'm just way too excited about the the potential of my new toy, anybody feel the same?

DBP
11-12-2011, 02:11 PM
I have one on the way, and I'm pretty excited to get the hack going. Would the difference be the equivilant of say.... Shooting on the AF100 with onboard codec vs shooting on the AF100 with recorder to pro res?

I find it pretty hard to get any real hack to non hack comparisons online, because all the examples are either simple scenes that don't push the codec, or they are compressed to hell through vimeo and youtube, which end up looking like crap fullscreen.

HDkilledFILM.
11-12-2011, 02:20 PM
To answer the question your thread poses: With the right DP? Yes.

L1N3ARX
11-12-2011, 03:26 PM
I have one on the way, and I'm pretty excited to get the hack going. Would the difference be the equivilant of say.... Shooting on the AF100 with onboard codec vs shooting on the AF100 with recorder to pro res?

I find it pretty hard to get any real hack to non hack comparisons online, because all the examples are either simple scenes that don't push the codec, or they are compressed to hell through vimeo and youtube, which end up looking like crap fullscreen.

The problem with many comparisons is that it's usually a shot of a tree or a leaf blowing in the wind or other innate objects. This will NEVER display what the hack is capable of... especially in the Youtube / Vimeo format. The first time you shoot footage of kids running around, hair blowing, and just normal movement... it's one of those jaw dropping moments, as if you ripped off Panasonic for the price you got the camera. Seriously... with a bit of good glass, you're going to be impressed to say the least.

toxotis70
11-12-2011, 03:31 PM
What sigma did you used ?
4/3 mount with adapter ?
Auto or manual focus ?
If AF, was it fast ?
I tried a lot of olympus - leica 4/3 lenses with adapter , but the are slow on focusing...

DrDave
11-12-2011, 03:47 PM
I love the camera, I don't think the hack makes a big difference; rather, there is a small difference: the camera is very good out of the box. Lighting more important than hack. High bit rates to me can sometimes look noisy, others really like the look of the noise.
I am pretty sure I could not pick out the difference in a double blind. I did like the super high ISO recently unlocked.
As far as people not knowing about it, I think a lot of ppl do :)

L1N3ARX
11-12-2011, 03:49 PM
Canon mount, with the kipon. I was under the impression that only panny lenses and some leica focus track, but kinda slow like you said. I just manually focus everything, but if its a setup / scripted shot, it's no biggie.

toxotis70
11-12-2011, 03:53 PM
here is my speed focus test with some lenses...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4J8eOyuC2o8

I (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4J8eOyuC2o8) shoot mostly kids - people... so fast AF is a must!

Cory Braun
11-12-2011, 03:59 PM
Are there any examples of the hack with something narrative. All the examples I see are of people's friends/children/etc. or the town they live in or of nature. I was not a huge fan of the GH2 look pre-hack and neither were most of my clients, which is why I sold mine, but I'd love to see an example of a narrative with proper lighting to see if the hack has changed my mind.

L1N3ARX
11-12-2011, 04:08 PM
Are there any examples of the hack with something narrative. All the examples I see are of people's friends/children/etc. or the town they live in or of nature. I was not a huge fan of the GH2 look pre-hack and neither were most of my clients, which is why I sold mine, but I'd love to see an example of a narrative with proper lighting to see if the hack has changed my mind.

I realize you asked for something with a narrative, but still this video is worth a mention http://vimeo.com/31256823. The shots are very well composed and its really just a beautiful little video. I'm planning a full length feature to be shot solely on the gh2 with the 176bit hack, so when that comes out it hopefully will show some GH2 potential. And here is something that looks like it was taken out of a narrative http://vimeo.com/26818589 , not too bad...

Cory Braun
11-12-2011, 04:13 PM
Thanks for the link. Let me know once you post some footage from your feature.

DBP
11-12-2011, 04:15 PM
The problem with many comparisons is that it's usually a shot of a tree or a leaf blowing in the wind or other innate objects. This will NEVER display what the hack is capable of... especially in the Youtube / Vimeo format. The first time you shoot footage of kids running around, hair blowing, and just normal movement... it's one of those jaw dropping moments, as if you ripped off Panasonic for the price you got the camera. Seriously... with a bit of good glass, you're going to be impressed to say the least.

What exactly is it that makes it jaw dropping, and that much better than stock? Detail, color, motion cadence? I'm curious.

Also, is there much difference between the 176mb patch, and the moderate bitrates increases, like the 44 and 66mb ones? It seems like the type of thing that would show the most improvement for the initial increase, and the the return would exponentially drop with each bitrate increase. But again, I don't know. I am really curious though.

L1N3ARX
11-12-2011, 04:27 PM
What exactly is it that makes it jaw dropping, and that much better than stock? Detail, color, motion cadence? I'm curious.

Also, is there much difference between the 176mb patch, and the moderate bitrates increases, like the 44 and 66mb ones? It seems like the type of thing that would show the most improvement for the initial increase, and the the return would exponentially drop with each bitrate increase. But again, I don't know. I am really curious though.

Well, I did just get the camera 3 weeks ago, and am sort of stepping into the DSLR world myself, so I definitely lack the ability to describe technically the variables at play, but an obvious one aside from increasing the bitrate / data captured in each pixel, would be lowering the GOP down to 1. At 24p you have "24 key frames" without interlaced frames... which is easily noticeable with any amount of considerable movement, and in my opinion makes a pretty big difference in getting the "film look".

Sage
11-12-2011, 06:37 PM
http://vimeo.com/26257939

kevin baggott
11-12-2011, 06:51 PM
I shot a very low budget indy feature with this camera in ireland about 6 weeks ago. I was in the boondocks - and really had not budget for a dp - so I would set up the shots, get my exposures and have my wife hit record. I was playing the lead in it. It's rough - sure - but when I throw the image up on my projector - shit.... it helps shooting in ireland mind ya :) Below is two very rough trailers I banged out on fcpx - learning it - I'm no editor :) but thought I would share.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxgE7U4Y5_s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTXqUwGbMJo

ed_lee83
11-13-2011, 05:21 AM
I shot a very low budget indy feature with this camera in ireland about 6 weeks ago. I was in the boondocks - and really had not budget for a dp - so I would set up the shots, get my exposures and have my wife hit record. I was playing the lead in it. It's rough - sure - but when I throw the image up on my projector - s**t.... it helps shooting in ireland mind ya :) Below is two very rough trailers I banged out on fcpx - learning it - I'm no editor :) but thought I would share.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxgE7U4Y5_s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTXqUwGbMJo

is that you running stark bollock naked?! fair play to ya

As for me I'd still like to create something really awesome with anamorphic lenses. That unique look coupled with the hacked GH2 ought to be a winning combo. But so far I've only shot an obscure music video and some forgettable "for Vimeo" type vids.
But mind you I am very impressed how the GH2 has progressed. Now I feel there is no excuse to go out and create something great with this awesome (and affordable) tool.

Then there's procrastination.

Ian-T
11-13-2011, 09:06 AM
I love the camera, I don't think the hack makes a big difference; rather, there is a small difference: the camera is very good out of the box. Lighting more important than hack. High bit rates to me can sometimes look noisy, others really like the look of the noise.
I am pretty sure I could not pick out the difference in a double blind. I did like the super high ISO recently unlocked.
As far as people not knowing about it, I think a lot of ppl do
What you say may be true for static "well lit" shots but for everything else I can't agree. The stock GH-2 is plenty sharp and has nice colors but when it comes to motion and dark areas it looks like mush. This is the case with all the DSLRs. My pet peeve for CMOS based (maybe it's an AVCHD thing) cameras AND camcorders was always the smoothed over mushy look in dark or underexposed areas. The stock GH2 is no exception. But with the hacked high bit rate GH-2....it's ALL gone. I wish ALL cameras (especially in this price range) could do this.

Now when it comes to the noise there are times I like the textured look of it. Then there are times I really don't want it there at all. Yes, the GH-2 seems to produce a bit of noise in certain shots. But here's the big difference between the hacked and stock footage... detail. I know you've heard it before and are probably sick of people making the claim...but the proof is in the pudding. Because of the stock GH2's lower bit rate and noisier sensor you will never get the FULL detail out of the camera. Colors are less accurate and the compression just smoothes everything over. This is why more folks didn't have a problem with noise early on. It, as well as a lot of the detail, was hidden and masked by the "mush/compression artifacts." By Vitaliy opening up the camera to higher bit rates we now can see the fuill potential of the sensor and that includes the noise. Do you notice as you go up in ISO on this camera (and basically every other camera out there) when it gets noisier you start to loose detail and color? Not anymore. Everything is now retained and gives us more options in post. The image detail, particularly in the dark areas, is much better. The stock footage, at the lower bit rate, would just smooth over the noise and would often cause compression artifacts (especially in motion). You get barley a hint of that (if any) with the hacked footage. As a matter of fact when cleaning up the stock footage you would lose even more detail in the dark areas. You don't have that issue at all with the hacked version. With a good noise reduction software like Neat video (best that I've come accross) you will retain all of your detail.

Another thing is the motion of the hacked camera is miles ahead of the stock. Remember when the GH-1 first came out @ 17Mbps and the famous "mush" appeared when in motion? We all blamed the lower bit rate (which was "sort" of correct). Well I've seen that issue with my Canon 7D and in other Canon footage as well but to a much lesser degree. The stock GH-2 was no exception. In the higher bit rate GH-2...it's gone.
So, my point in writing all of this is to say that Yes...the hack does make a big difference. Those are just "some" of the examples that stick out to me. Others might have more or less.


Then there's procrastination.

He he... here's my issue also.

Ian-T
11-13-2011, 09:16 AM
Another thing to consider when it comes to the issue of noise in the GH-2 is the ISO bug that was recently discoveredn Not a lot of folks know about this and just blame the sensor. But thank God for the workaround.

J Davis
11-13-2011, 09:29 AM
Another thing to consider when it comes to the issue of noise in the GH-2 is the ISO bug that was recently discoveredn Not a lot of folks know about this and just blame the sensor. But thank God for the workaround.

what's the iso bug and workaround?

Ian-T
11-13-2011, 09:50 AM
I can't find the thread that discusses it on personal-view dot com but it's relatively easy. ISO 320 seems pretty noisy on this camera though it has been the cleanest on others (Canons etc.). What I've learned recently is that if you want to shoot at that ISO you have to first scroll to 400 ISO and then backwards to 320 (as opposed to scrolling to it from a lower ISO). The image comes out as clean as expected. The average Joe, like myself, woud just scroll to ISO 320 and shoot without having a clue and in the end blame the camera on being noisy. Some other folks state that this works at higher ISOs as well. But for now...I notice ISO 320 is not much of a problem as it was before. This probably also explains why at times when I shot ISO 800 -1600 I would sometimes get nice clean images vs the nois(ier) ones.

EDIT: Ok here it is -- http://personal-view.com/talks/discussion/comment/22936#Comment_22936

The bug seems to be at ISO 320, 640 and 1250

J Davis
11-13-2011, 10:34 AM
thanks ian

Perry Wilson
11-13-2011, 11:10 AM
Im the DP on this feature film www.momentoftruthfilm.com we just finished shooting on set for our first shoot day. Had a great crew of about 15 using all britek lights we had to replicate day for half and moonlight for the second half... EVERYONE, and I mean EVERYONE, Producer, Director, Make-up dept. WAS BLOWN AWAY at the footage coming off my camera, I was even amazed. Im shooting GH2 (Driftwood reAQuainted 176mbit GOP1(best patch imo)) Sandisk Extreme Pro 45mb/s 8gb cards(ONLY card that works with NO issues but only the 8gb though becuase they are still SDHC, once you get the 16gb cards they turn into SDXC(GH2 non compliant)) with a set of LOMO Primes 28 f/2, 35 f/2, 50 f/2, 75 f/2 and Jupiter 135 f/3.5 ( all the LOMO f/2's act like f/1.8(based on testing) and the panny 14-42 for one pick up shot.

In short, YES the GH2 IS THE CINEMA CAMERA for the low/no budget, or even big budget film maker... P.S. for 1080p Delivery I choose it over RED based on workflow...

Cosimo Bullo
11-13-2011, 11:30 AM
Since I got this camera a few weeks ago, I feel as if I have this secret weapon that nobody knows about. Talking within the "cinema" realm of planned / scripted shots, where achieving the "cinema" look is definitely on your short list, this camera is absolutely unreal. I showed a couple friends and family who are film buffs raw footage with a Sigma 30mm 1.4 and 176bit hack, and they thought they were actually looking something shot on film stock. I am so oddly satisfied by the GH2, that I find myself smirking when I see people spending 5-10k on higher priced cameras and arguing which one looks more like film (totally subjective of course). I can't help it, this camera is just too good, and it's not even a price thing, I could see myself trying to buy this camera at around 5k if I saw what I'm shooting now. Obviously, the right tool for the right job, and many people need a real camera and not a picture camera that makes amazing video, but seriously... after seeing some of this footage.. good lord. You'd almost think people would be chomping at the bit, to get close to what this camera is doing now that it's hacked. Maybe I'm just way too excited about the the potential of my new toy, anybody feel the same?

Everyday!

brunerww
11-13-2011, 12:00 PM
I shot a very low budget indy feature with this camera in ireland about 6 weeks ago. I was in the boondocks - and really had not budget for a dp - so I would set up the shots, get my exposures and have my wife hit record. I was playing the lead in it. It's rough - sure - but when I throw the image up on my projector - s**t.... it helps shooting in ireland mind ya :) Below is two very rough trailers I banged out on fcpx - learning it - I'm no editor :) but thought I would share.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxgE7U4Y5_s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTXqUwGbMJo

Kevin - watching your trailer, I didn't care what it was shot on or what the bit rate was -- it is brilliant. Where can I see the full version? I'd pay to see the rest.

Bill

OldCorpse
11-13-2011, 01:36 PM
Yep, Kevin, I'd be another paying customer!

GH2user
11-13-2011, 02:01 PM
Here's a music video I just directed/DP/edited with the GH2...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gh2v4lFu6c

It's pretty ridiculous... but just look at the shadows and underexposed areas. This look would NEVER be possible with the stock GH2. I tried when I first got my GH2 (stock) and I almost sold it out of frustration with lack of underexposed detail and shadow mud. I love low natural light shooting... and the stock GH2 was just sadly not capable of what I wanted. Also, the stock 24mb/s is just not gradable at all. It's terrible, seriously. As much crap as the Canon h.264 50mb/s codec gets... it's MUCH better than the GH2/AF-100's stock 24mb/s. Softer, for sure... but holds up better in coloring. Needless, to say the hack fixed the crap out of this. The GOP1 175mb/s is truly something to behold...

The 60fps in 720p is also pretty amazing. There is a little bit more banding... but the detail is GREAT. The detail in 720p mode looks like 1080p on my 7D or 5D.

Then there is also the motion factor. Long-GOP just looks bad. It's doesn't look like real 24fps, as there are frames being used to "build" other frames in each sequence. This creates weird motion where some parts of the frame look as if they are moving at different shutter speeds or something. I don't know all the technical details either... but it's essentially temporal-compression. The all-I mode has the same motion as Red or a film-DI would. One frame is one frame. No "interpolation" or any of that other crap they claim is more "efficient". Sometimes, less is more...


I don't even tell people what I shoot on anymore. I just say "just some camera". If people want to think that big bulky cameras with XLR inputs somehow make a better image... then let them. It's better for us. :Drogar-BigGrin(DBG)

Cheer's GH2ers... it really is a secret weapon. :kali:

JMZ
11-13-2011, 02:54 PM
I've spent the past week researching if I should buy an AF100 or a GH2. I've even attended a presentation by Barry (Green) a while back where he pointed out the strengths of the AF100. I'm an experienced videographer so I'm all about "purpose built" cams. Prior to this, I was close to buying an AF100 when RED said they'd release the Scarlet on Nov. 3rd. That turned out to not be to my liking because of features, price and workflow. So I was about to pull the trigger (again) on the AF when I heard about the GH2 from a coworker. "But it's a DSLR," I said. "So what? It get's the job done," he said. And after seeing the results of hacked GH2s the "bang for the buck" part of my brain is shouting at me to give this some serious thought.

Question: can the camera be reverted back to the default settings? I'm not too concerned about warranty issues. But I don't want to brick it.

Gargravarr
11-13-2011, 03:26 PM
Question: can the camera be reverted back to the default settings? I'm not too concerned about warranty issues. But I don't want to brick it.

Yes. I don't think there comes a risk with patching the firmware at this point.

DBP
11-13-2011, 03:30 PM
So the 176mb patch is basically the equivalent of of hooking it up to an external recorder, right?

JMZ
11-13-2011, 04:04 PM
Yes. I don't think there comes a risk with patching the firmware at this point.
Thanks Gargravarr,

With all due apologies to Barry. I think I'm going to pick up a GH2 this week. I already have audio gear so shooting double system sound isn't an issue for me. Also, couldn't someone hack an AF100 and reduce the need for external recorders? I'm sure it's probably not as easy as all that...but to me that seems like the best of both worlds.

J Davis
11-13-2011, 04:16 PM
does anyone know accurately measured dynamic range for gh2, af100, fs100 ?

GH2user
11-13-2011, 06:23 PM
Also, couldn't someone hack an AF100 and reduce the need for external recorders? I'm sure it's probably not as easy as all that...but to me that seems like the best of both worlds.

The guy who hacked the GH2 actually said that a patch could be released quite easily for the AF-100... but he doesn't want to do it. Apparently, he doesn't like the way Panasonic is holding back the tech and basically up-selling cheaper technology or something like that. I basically agree... it's in the best interest of the market and consumers to just drop the video division and just start building hybrids with XLR "modules" and such. All the waveform monitors, color profiles, "pro" features, and ect... are all just software... which the GH2 is also capable of.

It's the natural progression of imaging... and all the manufactures are adamant about holding it back.

J Davis
11-13-2011, 07:49 PM
okay I'm attempting to answer my own question and posting what I've found from digging ... its like talking to oneself which I do anyway !
Please add or rip into this post if I've posted inaccurate or outdated stuff

AF100 (barry greens test) 10.5 stops of dynamic range LINK (http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?260461-FS100-and-AF100-compared)
FS100 (barry greens test) 11 stops of dynamic range LINK (http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?260461-FS100-and-AF100-compared)
FS100 (blog.abelcine.com) 10 stops of dynamic range LINK (http://blog.abelcine.com/2011/05/27/sony-fs100-ratings-and-dynamic-range/#more-12208)
GH2 (dpreview) shows a chart of dynamic range as tested from a jpeg still LINK (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicDMCGH2/page12.asp)
and I can count about ~ 6 stops (17 one third stops) on my laptop screen,
however, maybe you can count more.
I've been unable to find a DR test for the GH2 from movie mode, hacked or otherwise.

Cosimo Bullo
11-13-2011, 08:45 PM
Yes. I don't think there comes a risk with patching the firmware at this point.

Not quite, but very close.

AdrianF
11-14-2011, 01:43 AM
GH2 (dpreview) shows a chart of dynamic range as tested from a jpeg still LINK (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicDMCGH2/page12.asp)
and I can count about ~ 6 stops (17 one third stops) on my laptop screen,
however, maybe you can count more.
I thought DR on the GH1 was around 8.5 stops in movie mode. I would imagine the GH2 is slightly better, but perhaps someone else could chime in. I'd be interested to know.

Perry Wilson
11-14-2011, 06:57 AM
From the footage I have, I dont see it being under 8 stops, but again this isnt tests, this is just sampled footage based on previous footage from other cams comparison...

GH2user
11-14-2011, 12:40 PM
I'd say 7-8 with Lumix lenses and 10-11 with Canon, Nikon, or Ziess.

There's no way the GH2, under optimal conditions, has less than 10 stops. The GH1 in the first Zacuto shootout was measured at 9... Having under 10 stops would be really bad for a modern sensor.

Lpowell
11-14-2011, 12:59 PM
does anyone know accurately measured dynamic range for gh2...
At ISO 160-200 it's close to 11 stops:

http://www.sensorgen.info/PanasonicDMC_GH2.html

And the GH1 has a bit more:

http://www.sensorgen.info/PanasonicDMC-GH1.html

J Davis
11-14-2011, 01:29 PM
Thanks Ipowel, I had actually seen those results before ... they got them from here.
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/DxOMark-review-for-the-Panasonic-Lumix-DMC-GH2
Unfortunately they never posted their test - they only published the results. For this reason I had trouble with the credibility of it.


The GH1 in the first Zacuto shootout was measured at 9...
As problematic and debated as the zacuto shootouts were I loved the spirit and effort they put in. Thanks for reminding me of
their findings as I had forgotten.

JMZ
11-14-2011, 02:26 PM
The guy who hacked the GH2 actually said that a patch could be released quite easily for the AF-100... but he doesn't want to do it. Apparently, he doesn't like the way Panasonic is holding back the tech and basically up-selling cheaper technology or something like that. I basically agree... it's in the best interest of the market and consumers to just drop the video division and just start building hybrids with XLR "modules" and such. All the waveform monitors, color profiles, "pro" features, and ect... are all just software... which the GH2 is also capable of.

It's the natural progression of imaging... and all the manufactures are adamant about holding it back.

Well, as a former employee of a Panasonic reseller I can *sort of* see why they'd hold back. However as a user I would love to have the visuals from the 176mb Drifwood hack along with the form-factor, timecode and XLRs of the AF100. If they really took the time to consider how many new users they would win over they might end up making more than they think. But what do I know.

Hence, I can totally see why an independent would draw the line and say no to developing that particular piece of software. Why should they help Panasonic sell more expensive gear. It's all one really crazy game. Even I had to ask myself if it was worth an extra $3800 to have on those extra features when I still have to buy lenses. After some really intensive thought I said no.

And now I don't know that Panasonic would really endanger the whole 160, 170, 250 line. They're really nice cameras. I got to play with some of them last week. But I can buy my GH2, a couple of lenses, media and some other toys for less money. Plus get a stunning image.

I am so gonna' hack my camera.

AdrianF
11-14-2011, 03:23 PM
This old post from Hunter Richards (http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?169780-GH1-Dynamic-Range-Results-(in-video-mode)-amp-other-stuff&p=1623056#post1623056) does put useable range at around 6 stops for the GH1. Looking at the wildly varied figures, it's hard to make sense of what the DR is on both cams. If it's possible to pull out more detail from the shadows with improved compression ( via the hack ), then it does make sense that this figure is going to increase.

stefancolson
11-14-2011, 04:27 PM
I haven't done any sort of controlled comparison, but shooting side by side with the 7D and 5DmkII the GH2 seems to do at least as well in terms of latitude/DR. I would be shocked if the GH2 (hacked) is less than 10 stops of DR.

Shenan
11-15-2011, 10:15 AM
Just a few comments...

I haven't done any of the hacks yet, but it seems like it should not be any riskier than doing a factory firmware update, like the upcoming one. There is always a little bit of a risk of bricking an electronic device when updating firmware, regardless of if it's a factory update or a hack. One of the main risks is losing power during the update, but there are procedures to minimize that risk (full battery).

Regarding dynamic range, the dpreview review does have film mode dynamic range, even with the various modes, with interactive graphs and everything - scroll down a bit on this page: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicDMCGH2/page12.asp - looks like 8 stops in nostalgic mode, at least according to them.

Also, you can measure it yourself: http://nofilmschool.com/2011/10/in-depth-tutorial-finding-cameras-exposure/

J Davis
11-15-2011, 10:25 AM
Also, you can measure it yourself
thanks ... i don't have one yet, this would be pre-purchase research

dtzfilms
11-17-2011, 12:20 PM
Did the price for the GH2 body only go up by $100? Last I checked it was $800, now it's $900.
Also what's with the GH2K? Are these the same DMC GH2 DMC GH2K?

Aha! I just ordered one at Bhphoto. It's $795 with a 14-42 lens.

Perry Wilson
11-17-2011, 01:27 PM
Just a few comments...

I haven't done any of the hacks yet, but it seems like it should not be any riskier than doing a factory firmware update, like the upcoming one. There is always a little bit of a risk of bricking an electronic device when updating firmware, regardless of if it's a factory update or a hack. One of the main risks is losing power during the update, but there are procedures to minimize that risk (full battery).

Regarding dynamic range, the dpreview review does have film mode dynamic range, even with the various modes, with interactive graphs and everything - scroll down a bit on this page: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicDMCGH2/page12.asp - looks like 8 stops in nostalgic mode, at least according to them.

Also, you can measure it yourself: http://nofilmschool.com/2011/10/in-depth-tutorial-finding-cameras-exposure/

GH2 will NOT let you do a software updat UNLESS the battery has 3 bar, and updates only take a minute or 2

Danielvilliers
11-17-2011, 01:43 PM
Unfortunately I started a thread on personal-view about this situation that I was about the gh2 (hacked) need of recognition. The problem for me is that the gh2 is perhaps the least tested camera of the DSLR lot. Do you imagine that for me the first mature hd-DSLR is such an unknown quantity. Negligible moire/aliasing (even camera like the Sony F3 shows some), true high resolution, no heating, proper monitoring and very high bitrate and now intra codec and no proper test in the video mode. Things like the Dynamic range is pure mystery as have been discussed here. From the example I have seen it rivals the Canon. So as per the Zacuto test it should be around 11 stop!!!!!!! But if you listen to some it is more like 6.... with the patch and the way you can recover a lot more into the shadows it could be even higher than the Canon. So where is the truth.

Until we have some proper test, all this is just speculation. What will happen is that when the 1DX will come out, everybody will hail it as the true DSLR 2 camera and people will all be drooling of getting the $ 6800 camera while the gh2 is here. It is true that the 1DX will beat it in the low light and rolling shutter from what we have seen, but the gh2 is a true jewel nonetheless.

dtzfilms
11-17-2011, 01:55 PM
The guy who hacked the GH2 actually said that a patch could be released quite easily for the AF-100... but he doesn't want to do it. Apparently, he doesn't like the way Panasonic is holding back the tech and basically up-selling cheaper technology or something like that. I basically agree... it's in the best interest of the market and consumers to just drop the video division and just start building hybrids with XLR "modules" and such. All the waveform monitors, color profiles, "pro" features, and ect... are all just software... which the GH2 is also capable of.

It's the natural progression of imaging... and all the manufactures are adamant about holding it back.
Good point, but quite a few of us have invested in the AF100 and I'd love it if I could match the GH2's 176bpm with my AF100. Don't do it for the company. Do it for us, save us having to spend another $1000 on externals. I mean the only option for me now is to get a Samurai recorder/monitor which and then I'd be able to get in that ballpark with close to 100bpm. I mean that's incredible, isn't it. 176bpm, I'm guessing is lossless-projectable.

Hallvalla
11-17-2011, 02:54 PM
This is a screen grab - untouched - from one of Driftwood's patches (AQuarius v2). 1000+ ISO with the panny pancake 20 1.7.

Showing this one because of the non-existant banding in the blues. Pretty amazing.

43461

JMZ
11-18-2011, 01:20 PM
Good point, but quite a few of us have invested in the AF100 and I'd love it if I could match the GH2's 176bpm with my AF100. Don't do it for the company. Do it for us, save us having to spend another $1000 on externals.

Agreed. I totally support the stand they're taking. But the AF100 with the 176Mb hack would be absolutely amazing. All the visuals and lens options of the hacked GH2 with all the convenience of the AF's camera body. XLR, SDI, timecode, top and side handle, dual card slots and more battery options. Heck, if I had an AF100 (which is still a very real possibility...) I'd pay for the hack.

To be honest, I don't see why Panasonic doesn't give in and embrace the hacks completely. Yes, yes... they want to protect the high end cameras. But there's no way the ENG and sports shooters are going to use the AF100. Give those of us in the $2,500 to sub - $10,000 range an ideal option. Okay that last is just my opinion. But the hacked GH2 won me over to still cams with motion capabilities. Why can't the best features of both types of cameras be merged better?

Ryan Farnes
11-18-2011, 08:00 PM
Did the price for the GH2 body only go up by $100? Last I checked it was $800, now it's $900.
Also what's with the GH2K? Are these the same DMC GH2 DMC GH2K?

Aha! I just ordered one at Bhphoto. It's $795 with a 14-40 lens.

Yeah, what's up here? Price seems to be $899 now. Was $799 a couple of days ago right?

bming1
11-19-2011, 01:20 PM
I shot this with an unhacked GH2 and was quite pleased with the quality of the footage that came straight out of the camera. This is the kind of stuff I like shooting and would appreciate any advice on which hack I should try out. I value stability and reliability over any incremental quality improvements that can be gained from a hack. I apologize if this has been answered in some other thread, but I've looked and can't find a definitive guide that outlines the advantages and drawbacks of each of the hacks. Thanks in advance!

http://vimeo.com/32345582

brandon..

Ryan Farnes
11-21-2011, 02:58 PM
Yeah, what's up here? Price seems to be $899 now. Was $799 a couple of days ago right?

Holy crap!

14-140 now back at $1499.

14-42 still at $899.

The 14-140 was at $1199 for a few days longer than the $799 14-42.

If only I'd known it was a temporary sale...

DPStewart
11-21-2011, 05:25 PM
I shot this with an unhacked GH2 and was quite pleased with the quality of the footage that came straight out of the camera. This is the kind of stuff I like shooting and would appreciate any advice on which hack I should try out. I value stability and reliability over any incremental quality improvements that can be gained from a hack. I apologize if this has been answered in some other thread, but I've looked and can't find a definitive guide that outlines the advantages and drawbacks of each of the hacks. Thanks in advance!

http://vimeo.com/32345582

brandon..

Resolution be damned! THAT looks gorgeous!!!
When I see work like this I think to myself: "Just get killer glass and work on the grading!"

Thanks for posting.

(There's another guy here named dan.carter who posts really great works also done with a stock GH2.)

DBP
11-21-2011, 05:27 PM
I shot this with an unhacked GH2 and was quite pleased with the quality of the footage that came straight out of the camera. This is the kind of stuff I like shooting and would appreciate any advice on which hack I should try out. I value stability and reliability over any incremental quality improvements that can be gained from a hack. I apologize if this has been answered in some other thread, but I've looked and can't find a definitive guide that outlines the advantages and drawbacks of each of the hacks. Thanks in advance!

http://vimeo.com/32345582

brandon..

That looks fantastic, really really cool stuff. Great job!

bming1
11-21-2011, 07:41 PM
Resolution be damned! THAT looks gorgeous!!!
When I see work like this I think to myself: "Just get killer glass and work on the grading!"

Thanks for posting.

(There's another guy here named dan.carter who posts really great works also done with a stock GH2.)

I love both the GH2 and my Nikon 50mm f1.4. I had to put a variable ND filter in front of the glass, but the combo still offers up a beautiful look. Still need to work on lots of things like camera work and shot selection, but thanks for your kind words!

bming1
11-21-2011, 07:42 PM
That looks fantastic, really really cool stuff. Great job!

Thank you :) I appreciate the kind words.

gonzoish79
11-28-2011, 11:28 PM
That footage was rather impressive. Can't wait to get mine.

dtzfilms
11-29-2011, 01:23 AM
I shot this with an unhacked GH2 and was quite pleased with the quality of the footage that came straight out of the camera. This is the kind of stuff I like shooting and would appreciate any advice on which hack I should try out. I value stability and reliability over any incremental quality improvements that can be gained from a hack. I apologize if this has been answered in some other thread, but I've looked and can't find a definitive guide that outlines the advantages and drawbacks of each of the hacks. Thanks in advance!

http://vimeo.com/32345582

brandon..
I don't care about the footage, I just want the girl's bloody phone number!
Kidding, looks good.

AdrianF
11-29-2011, 02:02 AM
That looks really nice. Nice choice and consistency with the colours in particular. I might finally cave and go for a GH2, 25p or not.

karapetkov
11-29-2011, 07:22 AM
Since I got this camera a few weeks ago, I feel as if I have this secret weapon that nobody knows about. Talking within the "cinema" realm of planned / scripted shots, where achieving the "cinema" look is definitely on your short list, this camera is absolutely unreal. I showed a couple friends and family who are film buffs raw footage with a Sigma 30mm 1.4 and 176bit hack, and they thought they were actually looking something shot on film stock. I am so oddly satisfied by the GH2, that I find myself smirking when I see people spending 5-10k on higher priced cameras and arguing which one looks more like film (totally subjective of course). I can't help it, this camera is just too good, and it's not even a price thing, I could see myself trying to buy this camera at around 5k if I saw what I'm shooting now. Obviously, the right tool for the right job, and many people need a real camera and not a picture camera that makes amazing video, but seriously... after seeing some of this footage.. good lord. You'd almost think people would be chomping at the bit, to get close to what this camera is doing now that it's hacked. Maybe I'm just way too excited about the the potential of my new toy, anybody feel the same?

+1

I don't have one yet but I am amazed at what this camera is capable of. I am going that route too.

:engel017:

roei z
11-29-2011, 07:40 AM
That looks really nice. Nice choice and consistency with the colours in particular. I might finally cave and go for a GH2, 25p or not.

it is somewhat rumored that 25P will be encoded in the new Panny firmware (still, not native 25p but through interlace).
but still, who knows how they'll try to cripple the hack once you upgrade.

mr bill
11-29-2011, 08:07 AM
This from eoshd.com -

I contacted a source at Panasonic about what the ‘new video mode’ is on the official GH2 firmware update that is coming in December. It is a 24Mbit 1080/25p output stored in a AVCHD 50i wrapper, meaning you can finally extract a clean high bitrate 25p (progressive) feed from the camera for PAL broadcast work.
This makes the camera suitable for professional work in Europe and other PAL regions.

roei z
11-29-2011, 08:11 AM
^^^^^ yup

karapetkov
11-29-2011, 08:34 AM
:2vrolijk_08:

roei z
11-29-2011, 08:37 AM
i wouldn't jump through the roof until it actually works.

karapetkov
11-29-2011, 08:39 AM
Too late. :Drogar-BigGrin(DBG)

mr bill
11-29-2011, 01:59 PM
Ha

Ryan Farnes
11-29-2011, 10:55 PM
Holy crap!

14-140 now back at $1499.

14-42 still at $899.

The 14-140 was at $1199 for a few days longer than the $799 14-42.

If only I'd known it was a temporary sale...

14-42 kit now $795 @ B&H
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/736365-REG/Panasonic_DMC_GH2K_K_Lumix_DMC_GH2_Digital_Camera. html

AdrianF
11-30-2011, 12:41 AM
It is a 24Mbit 1080/25p output stored in a AVCHD 50i wrapper, meaning you can finally extract a clean high bitrate 25p (progressive) feed from the camera for PAL broadcast work.
Fingers crossed that it will still be hackable. I'm looking at the GH2 as a b roll camera along with GH13, so sync wouldn't actually be too big an issue, but having the option to use it on interviews and music/performance shoots would be icing.

Ryan Farnes
12-15-2011, 11:24 PM
Just got back from a trip to Utah. I am previewing 66mb hack footage on a ghetto Hackintosh that can't play it back smoothly in VLC. Can't wait to get on my Mac Pro and 23" monitor to preview this stuff. It looks freaking insane.

This feels like what I was waiting for Scarlet for...

Ryan Farnes
12-15-2011, 11:34 PM
This compressed screengrab doesn't do it justice...but watching the native files is amazing. I think its the highest quality video I've ever shot.http://s11.postimage.org/yybit56fl/Picture_1.png

SuperSet
12-15-2011, 11:45 PM
You're right, that looks insane! What lens are you using?

Ryan Farnes
12-15-2011, 11:53 PM
You're right, that looks insane! What lens are you using?

14-42 kit. It can only go up from here...

:2vrolijk_08:

EDIT: Although...I do need to preview these on a 1080p monitor. Scaling the video does help it...

Kholi
12-15-2011, 11:55 PM
You may have to host your image on Photbucket or somewhere similar, Ryan, so that it'll show up.

Danielvilliers
12-16-2011, 12:22 AM
Yes can't see the screengrab

Dazza
12-16-2011, 02:21 AM
right click on the broken embedded link and open it in it's own tab. I can see it that way and it does indeed look very nice, I'm surprised that is the kit lens, nice composition

roei z
12-16-2011, 02:53 AM
what screengrab? i cannot see any screengrab

Dazza
12-16-2011, 02:57 AM
there broken image icon which goes to this link
http://s11.postimage.org/yybit56fl/Picture_1.png

roei z
12-16-2011, 04:12 AM
thanks. couldn't see it for some reason.
however, at least from the upload, those areas seem a bit limited with the bitrate.
45002

Ryan Farnes
12-16-2011, 09:18 AM
Sorry...DVXuser has always confused me on the image embeds.

Here is a direct download of a fullsize Mac OS screen grab:
http://ryanfarnes.com/images/Zion_National_Park.png

I was a bit limited by the time I had to prep for my trip, and my SD card on hand, but I should have shot with Driftwood's 176mb intra hack, but I am still really pleased with the results from cbrandin's 66mbit version. Watching it on my 23" monitor...it is just so crisp. Hands down blows the pants off what my T3i would have looked like.

Ryan Farnes
12-16-2011, 09:28 AM
Raw MTS will be up for a week here:
http://vimeo.com/33769465

karapetkov
12-16-2011, 01:14 PM
Thanks Ryan.

Ryan Farnes
12-16-2011, 01:46 PM
Thanks Ryan.

Моля.

I feel silly the MTS file will evaporate in a week. I really should get Vimeo Pro...I just feel like I post stuff rarely enough, a recurring $60/year feels annoying. I guess it might spur me to more action with video and posting stuff. Plus the quality would be better...camera tests would forever be downloadable with original file.

Hmmm...

Perry Wilson
12-16-2011, 04:23 PM
@ryan beautiful clip man

PaPa
12-16-2011, 04:27 PM
downloaded the file. Looks really great. Very excited for my gh2 to come in, and then it's the wacky world of finding the right hack and understanding whta he hell this GOP thing means..

The footage handles well, but there is still quite a bit of banding in the sky when you curve it.

Kholi
12-16-2011, 04:30 PM
What ISO did you use, Ryan?

Ryan Farnes
12-16-2011, 05:26 PM
What ISO did you use, Ryan?

Must have been 160. I was stopped down to f/22 probably on the 14-42 kit lens, its maximum. I have a .9 ND filter, but I can't remember if I had it on at the time. All the bright daylight stuff I shot was always at ISO 160.

You asking does remind about how the banding apparently manifests itself below 640 (was it?)

I should do some more tests...and if 640 ISO is cleaner for banding, I need to get some stronger ND filters.

Kholi
12-16-2011, 05:29 PM
It's below 320

This is why I keep telling people not to shoot below 320 indoors or out. You need a ton of ND.

Broad Daylight, to shoot ISO 400, you need to stack .3, .6, .9 to shoot a 2.8~4 split I believe.

I guess it's high time I do a detailed post on this... and the other benefits of using ND.

Ryan Farnes
12-16-2011, 05:36 PM
I'm just getting into this camera, and the banding is an issue. Good to know it can be mitigated.

I'll be interested to try some tests between 160, 320 and 640 to see how the banding fares.

Despite it all though, I am still in awe of the image it produces. I can see why people get GH2 crazy. I've shot with the Panasonic 200 and 170, the EX-1 (which perhaps was the cleanest I've shot) and the Canon 7D/T3i....but I get the feeling that the hacked GH2 is the cleanest image I've ever shot. Once I get the banding figured out, the sky is the limit.

(pardon the pun)

DvxHerb
12-16-2011, 05:50 PM
Kholi,

I would really appreciate your insights into the optimum ISOs and nd usage.

HHL
12-16-2011, 06:08 PM
Kholi,

I would really appreciate your insights into the optimum ISOs and nd usage.

+1

hendosan
12-16-2011, 11:16 PM
Shoot at the lowest ISO's you can to preserve dynamic range and reduce noise (on almost every camera this is probably 160 or 320), then use ND's as needed to control your exposure (changing shutter speed can screw up how your motion appears, and stopping down past f/11 on most lenses can introduce chromatic aberration).

Kholi
12-16-2011, 11:40 PM
Shoot at the lowest ISO's you can to preserve dynamic range and reduce noise (on almost every camera this is probably 160 or 320), then use ND's as needed to control your exposure (changing shutter speed can screw up how your motion appears, and stopping down past f/11 on most lenses can introduce chromatic aberration).

Sigh...

omnidecay
12-17-2011, 01:05 AM
Kholi,

I would really appreciate your insights into the optimum ISOs and nd usage.

+2

keep it moving Jay
12-17-2011, 04:54 AM
It's below 320

This is why I keep telling people not to shoot below 320 indoors or out. You need a ton of ND.

Broad Daylight, to shoot ISO 400, you need to stack .3, .6, .9 to shoot a 2.8~4 split I believe.

I guess it's high time I do a detailed post on this... and the other benefits of using ND.

I use the fader variable ND filter, pricey but it gives me 8 stops. yes 8 stops.

i shot at .95 with my voightlander, middle of the afternoon sun shining in LA and I still had more stops left on my fader. I even filmed birds in the sky, mid-afternoon, sunny. My gh2 recorded some passing clouds with detail, yes the clouds were distinguished from the sky above the clouds. usually one would get a large blob of white.

iso 160

Kholi
12-17-2011, 09:02 AM
Hey Jay,

Can you post that clip MTS for us to check out? To see if the banding is wild or non existent?

PaPa
12-17-2011, 10:45 AM
regarding not shooting below 320, makes sense. More noise breaks up the banding so it would only be natural to shoot gradients above a certain iso to break it up.

Kholi
12-17-2011, 10:50 AM
regarding not shooting below 320, makes sense. More noise breaks up the banding so it would only be natural to shoot gradients above a certain iso to break it up.

That's the first thing.

The second thing is how the camera processes software ISO's as well. We don't know exactly which setting is the real native setting (at least I haven't seen any engineer give that info), and until we do, we won't know exactly how we should shoot.

Vitaly said, over on Personal View, they should give us this info or only give us the option to shoot native/hardware ISOs and I agree with him. You don't need increments, you need to either open up, use a slower shutter, ND down, or add more (take away) light.

keep it moving Jay
12-17-2011, 12:24 PM
Hey Jay,

Can you post that clip MTS for us to check out? To see if the banding is wild or non existent?

in que to uploading on vimeo

keep it moving Jay
12-17-2011, 12:57 PM
http://vimeo.com/33837302

see opening frame and around 0:28

Kholi
12-17-2011, 01:36 PM
Yeah you won't get banding with a situation like that, there are a lot of clouds etc to break up the solid space.

However, that Fader is kind of weird looking. Never been a fan of those.

Kholi
12-17-2011, 01:44 PM
P.S. Ryan Farnes -- Thanks for being the very first official comment on our blog. Haha. Rockin'.

Kholi
12-17-2011, 03:18 PM
Here's the ISO post:

http://www.campcomet.com/

First one at the top.

My word's not gospel, please research and test yourself and share with us what you think. Knowledge is awesome.

yoclay
12-18-2011, 12:34 AM
How would shooting uncompressed hdmi deal with this banding issue?
In other words is this a compression issue?

Kholi
12-18-2011, 01:59 AM
How would shooting uncompressed hdmi deal with this banding issue?
In other words is this a compression issue?

It's color space and 8-bit I believe, but someone else may be able to expand on that.

4:2:0 and 8-bit don't mix well. 4:2:2 and 8-bit can be fine, or 4:2:0 and 10-bit.

HDMI wouldn't help it, I believe. I am pretty sure it's at the Sensor and not at the encoder.

Anyone?

dcloud
12-18-2011, 02:13 AM
It's color space and 8-bit I believe, but someone else may be able to expand on that.

4:2:0 and 8-bit don't mix well. 4:2:2 and 8-bit can be fine, or 4:2:0 and 10-bit.

HDMI wouldn't help it, I believe. I am pretty sure it's at the Sensor and not at the encoder.

Anyone? but af100 outputs hd-sdi at 4:2:2 8bit and yet it still exhibits banding... my guess is its 8 bit thats the main culprit

Kholi
12-18-2011, 02:26 AM
but af100 outputs hd-sdi at 4:2:2 8bit and yet it still exhibits banding... my guess is its 8 bit thats the main culprit

I thought AF100's compression all happens at the DSP anyway? THat's why HDMI isn't really worth using on that camera?

C300 is 4:2:2 8-Bit and it's being reported that it's definitely behaving beyond what it's spec'd.