Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Reviewed: Canon 7D vs. Panasonic GH1

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Reviewed: Canon 7D vs. Panasonic GH1

    Canon 7D vs. Panasonic GH1
    Is one of these "the new DVX"
    by Barry Green

    Click here to read the full article

    #2
    Wow, this was an excellent read and basically sums up everything that I think about both cams. Thanks Barry. Spot on.

    The way these cams are “right now”, if I had the money, I would own both for their strengths. But, as your article suggest, I chose one for my particular need.

    Comment


      #3
      Barry-

      Once again, thank u for doing the heavy lifting. As I have mentioned before, we are all better off because of your efforts to provide this forum with top notch analysis.

      So much of my business is talking head interviews. On top of that, I'm still delivering sd dvds to my clients.

      Because of my particular needs, I'm leaning towards the GH1 because of 720p being "good enough" for my down convert to 16x9 sd dvds. So I'll learn to run double system audio but at $800 for a GH1 body and several dollars more for 35mm lens, I'm sure I can create a sweet looking interview image.

      Thoughts?

      YMMV

      Be well

      Rob
      the story is never black & white
      it takes Smalltalk to reveal the color

      smalltalk.productions

      Comment


        #4
        That setup can deliver gorgeous results, so long as you watch out for things that cause aliasing artifacts (certain patterns or fabrics, or thin-rimmed glasses). And you might want to invest in an inexpensive prime lens, a 50mm/1.4 should be easily available for under $50 and would make for a nice portrait look. The stock lens is plenty sharp, but at f/4 it doesn't really provide for that hyper-shallow depth of field look that makes certain interview shots so attractive.
        ..
        The AU-EVA1 Book - The DVX200 Book - The UX180 & UX90 Book - Lighting For Film & TV - Sound For Film & TV

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by Barry_Green View Post
          That setup can deliver gorgeous results, so long as you watch out for things that cause aliasing artifacts (certain patterns or fabrics, or thin-rimmed glasses). And you might want to invest in an inexpensive prime lens, a 50mm/1.4 should be easily available for under $50 and would make for a nice portrait look. The stock lens is plenty sharp, but at f/4 it doesn't really provide for that hyper-shallow depth of field look that makes certain interview shots so attractive.
          barry-

          thanks for the quick feedback.

          your suggestions are exactly in line with my thinking-720p will give me 16x9 qnd plenty of pixels to down convert for the standard def dvds. a 50mm/1.4 or 1.7 decent glass prime along with a 28mm/2.8 and even a 85mm/2.8 would give me plenty of options.

          would you know what the multiplier factor is with the gh1?

          and then there is the whole double system audio and i'm good to go.

          lastly, how will final cut pro play with pannie's 720p codec from the gh1? i thought i remembered reading that it's a flavor of jpeg or something. care to explain further?

          as mentioned, thanks. if you are ever in nyc, i owe u a cup of decent coffee!

          be well

          rob
          the story is never black & white
          it takes Smalltalk to reveal the color

          smalltalk.productions

          Comment


            #6
            Fantastic article. Thank you for your hard work!
            Specializing in Bio Documentaries, Motion Graphics, & Fashion Films

            Follow me on Twitter:
            http://twitter.com/drurybynum

            Drury Bynum
            http://drurybynum.com
            drury@drurybynum.com
            mobile: 443.255.0085

            Comment


              #7
              I've been on the fence for a few weeks now. This has helped a lot. Thanks again, Barry.
              GH5s w/ 15+ lenses, sound & lighting gear - Available for rent/hire in the San Francisco Bay Area, and beyond. Have passport. Will travel.
              www.philliphudson.com

              Comment


                #8
                Thanks for another very informative article, Barry.

                Just curious why you chose Zeiss lenses over Nikon or Canon.
                www.HotSpotsOnline.com

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by Sumfun View Post
                  Thanks for another very informative article, Barry.

                  Just curious why you chose Zeiss lenses over Nikon or Canon.
                  Because the construction quality and the optical quality are the most like true cinema lenses, at the most affordable price. The ZF lenses are the exact same glass that's used in the Zeiss Compact Primes PL-mount lens set. I actually considered getting a set of CP's, because I'm tired of dealing with the goofiness of still-camera lenses that were never designed for cinema work. But the $27,000 price tag for a set of four was quite off-putting, and the PL mount would make them unable to be used on something like a Canon or Nikon body.

                  The ZFs, on the other hand, are 1/4 the price and have the identical same optical characteristics as the Compact Primes. The focus rings are exquisite, designed more for cinema use than the typical short-throw SLR focus ring. My 85mm lens has a 270-degree focus travel, it's just perfect. The Nikon mount makes them adaptable to pretty much any camera out there, whether Nikon, Canon, Panasonic, or Red. And after the Duclos modification, the iris ring becomes comparable to a cinema lens iris ring as well, and with standard gearing and standardized fronts, they pretty much overcome all the hassles of still lenses and deliver the visual quality of cinema primes. The only major annoyance left is that they focus backwards, because Nikon lenses focus backwards, but a follow focus with reverse gear will fix that.
                  ..
                  The AU-EVA1 Book - The DVX200 Book - The UX180 & UX90 Book - Lighting For Film & TV - Sound For Film & TV

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by Barry_Green View Post
                    Because the construction quality and the optical quality are the most like true cinema lenses, at the most affordable price. The ZF lenses are the exact same glass that's used in the Zeiss Compact Primes PL-mount lens set. I actually considered getting a set of CP's, because I'm tired of dealing with the goofiness of still-camera lenses that were never designed for cinema work. But the $27,000 price tag for a set of four was quite off-putting, and the PL mount would make them unable to be used on something like a Canon or Nikon body.

                    The ZFs, on the other hand, are 1/4 the price and have the identical same optical characteristics as the Compact Primes. The focus rings are exquisite, designed more for cinema use than the typical short-throw SLR focus ring. My 85mm lens has a 270-degree focus travel, it's just perfect. The Nikon mount makes them adaptable to pretty much any camera out there, whether Nikon, Canon, Panasonic, or Red. And after the Duclos modification, the iris ring becomes comparable to a cinema lens iris ring as well, and with standard gearing and standardized fronts, they pretty much overcome all the hassles of still lenses and deliver the visual quality of cinema primes. The only major annoyance left is that they focus backwards, because Nikon lenses focus backwards, but a follow focus with reverse gear will fix that.
                    Barry-

                    After a quick Google search, I read the following:

                    "Some years ago Zeiss licensed Kyrocera of Japan to use the name Zeiss on some lenses made for the Contax brand of cameras. Life was good.

                    Contax went out of business in 2005, ending the need for these lenses. As soon as the agreement expired in 2006, Zeiss looked for something to do with the Japanese manufacturing capacity.

                    Zeiss decided to put these former Contax mount lenses in Nikon mounts instead, and that's how we get these ZF lenses. These are new lenses made in Nikon mount.

                    This lens is not made in Germany and it is not made in a Zeiss factory. It is made in Japan by Cosina, the same company that made the cheap FM-10 for Nikon and many other inexpensive lenses and cameras for third-party makers for many decades."

                    http://www.kenrockwell.com/zeiss/zf50.htm

                    Thoughts?

                    Be well

                    Rob
                    the story is never black & white
                    it takes Smalltalk to reveal the color

                    smalltalk.productions

                    Comment


                      #11
                      You can probably find a hundred reviews about the ZF lenses on the web. One of them (Ken Rockwell's) is negative. Every other review I found is gushing.

                      Rockwell's review is hostile from the opening sentence. Using phrases such as "the cheap FM-10" and "manual focus went obsolete 20 years ago" are just hostile and fuddy. Reading it, it sounded like he had a chip on his shoulder from the beginning. Now, I don't know or care what he prefers, but what I wanted was excellent performance, beautiful imagery, and the slickest, sweetest manual focus I could get, and the ZF has it. Oh, and it also happens to have gorgeous build quality overall, and stellar performance, and really has nothing in common with a "cheap FM-10".

                      I was initially bothered by Ken Rockwell's review, and frankly it made me hold off on buying any of these lenses for quite a while. But after something like a dozen other, screamingly praising reviews everywhere else, I took the gamble. I got the 50mm because it was the cheapest, and ... it's the cheapest. It's my least favorite. If anyone was going to complain about any of the ZFs, it would be this one. But even so, if you stop it down a couple of stops, it begins to become wonderful. So I no longer put any stock in that review. Besides, what he wanted is not what I want -- he wanted a lens he could "focus with one finger" and that had autofocus. I wanted a lens that delivered cinema-worthy results, for a lot less than the Compact Primes.

                      Secondly, the ZFs are not the same lenses as the Contax ones were. The optical design is different, and reviews have shown the ZFs to outperform the older Contax designs.

                      Third, pick one up and hold it -- you'll be able to tell the difference between a ZF and any other SLR lens. It does exactly what I want -- gorgeous image rendering, beautiful solid delicious construction quality, and heavenly manual focus with massively long focus throw.

                      Fourth, lenses are a matter of preference, some like and prefer the warm/soft Cooke look, others prefer the Leica look, I happen to crave the Zeiss look of super-sharp and ultra-contrasty.

                      Fifth, I repeat -- Zeiss now sells the same glass to the cinema world as the Compact Primes, where each lens is rehoused in a PL housing with proper cinema focus and throw, witness marks for the focus and iris, and standardized fronts. Those lenses cost upwards of $4,000 each, and a complete set of seven costs over $27,000. The glass is the exact same in the ZFs. For $250 apiece you can get these lenses modified to perform much more like cinema lenses, so for 1/3 the price you're getting cinema-ized versions that perform like a professional cinema lens set...

                      In any case, any of these SLR lenses are massive overkill for SLR video use. If you want to buy a lens for shooting HDSLR video, a cheap 50mm will be just as sharp as a ZF or other premium stills lens.
                      Last edited by Barry_Green; 12-08-2009, 01:21 PM.
                      ..
                      The AU-EVA1 Book - The DVX200 Book - The UX180 & UX90 Book - Lighting For Film & TV - Sound For Film & TV

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Thank you so much for your article Barry. It was a very neutral, balanced, informative perspective. We should REQUIRE that everyone in the DVXUser community read this.....so we cut out all of the "background noise".

                        Thanks again for all you do for our community!

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by Barry_Green View Post
                          You can probably find a hundred reviews about the ZF lenses on the web. One of them (Ken Rockwell's) is negative. Every other review I found is gushing.

                          Rockwell's review is hostile from the opening sentence. Using phrases such as "the cheap FM-10" and "manual focus went obsolete 20 years ago" are just hostile and fuddy. Reading it, it sounded like he had a chip on his shoulder from the beginning. Now, I don't know or care what he prefers, but what I wanted was excellent performance, beautiful imagery, and the slickest, sweetest manual focus I could get, and the ZF has it. Oh, and it also happens to have gorgeous build quality overall, and stellar performance, and really has nothing in common with a "cheap FM-10".

                          I was initially bothered by Ken Rockwell's review, and frankly it made me hold off on buying any of these lenses for quite a while. But after something like a dozen other, screamingly praising reviews everywhere else, I took the gamble. I got the 50mm because it was the cheapest, and ... it's the cheapest. It's my least favorite. If anyone was going to complain about any of the ZFs, it would be this one. But even so, if you stop it down a couple of stops, it begins to become wonderful. So I no longer put any stock in that review. Besides, what he wanted is not what I want -- he wanted a lens he could "focus with one finger" and that had autofocus. I wanted a lens that delivered cinema-worthy results, for a lot less than the Compact Primes.

                          Secondly, the ZFs are not the same lenses as the Contax ones were. The optical design is different, and reviews have shown the ZFs to outperform the older Contax designs.

                          Third, pick one up and hold it -- you'll be able to tell the difference between a ZF and any other SLR lens. It does exactly what I want -- gorgeous image rendering, beautiful solid delicious construction quality, and heavenly manual focus with massively long focus throw.

                          Fourth, lenses are a matter of preference, some like and prefer the warm/soft Cooke look, others prefer the Leica look, I happen to crave the Zeiss look of super-sharp and ultra-contrasty.

                          Fifth, I repeat -- Zeiss now sells the same glass to the cinema world as the Compact Primes, where each lens is rehoused in a PL housing with proper cinema focus and throw, witness marks for the focus and iris, and standardized fronts. Those lenses cost upwards of $4,000 each, and a complete set of seven costs over $27,000. The glass is the exact same in the ZFs. For $250 apiece you can get these lenses modified to perform much more like cinema lenses, so for 1/3 the price you're getting cinema-ized versions that perform like a professional cinema lens set...

                          In any case, any of these SLR lenses are massive overkill for SLR video use. If you want to buy a lens for shooting HDSLR video, a cheap 50mm will be just as sharp as a ZF or other premium stills lens.
                          Barry-

                          I appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts. I imagined/hoped that you were familiar with the Rockwell review of the ZF lenses.

                          I believe you have addressed the issues that any dvxuser would consider when they were looking for glass to be used with the GH1.

                          Be well

                          Rob
                          the story is never black & white
                          it takes Smalltalk to reveal the color

                          smalltalk.productions

                          Comment


                            #14
                            ignoring the manual focus part, ken rockwell seems happy with the performance.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Great to hear your thoughts on this. Now if I can just find that body only GH1 . . .

                              Justin

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X