GH2 320/640 bug fix. GH2 users attempting to use 320 and 640 please take a look at this

C

Cosimo Bullo

Veteran
I may have missed this in another thread, but if I did, so may some of you as well, so I thought I'd report some findings. We all know about the 320/640 noise bug and fix with the GH2. This is not a repeat of that issue but rather a new attempt to deal consistently with the issue.


I love the look of 320ISO on the GH2 but I have been bitten my the 320 noise bug many times in the past, even when trying diligently to use the 320 fix (going down from a higher ISO). This has caused me to wonder at times whether there might be other issues that effect the issue like shutter speed, or mode (cinema, smooth, etc)… in short, I've been frustrated.


Well I think I've finally sussed it out. Yes, the 320 (and 640) bug fix does work from a higher ISO - BUT only in you come down from the higher ISO avoiding 1250 and 640 ISO! If you start at 800 ISO, click to 640 ISO and then to 320 the noise will appear as if you started the camera from 320. If you start at 800 and click to 400 and then to 320 the noise is controlled as it should be. Same with 1600 to 1250 to 640 to 320 (noise), as opposed to 1600 to 800 to 400 to 320 (clean).


I believe this may be the culprit for some of the anomalous findings people have come up with in previous noise tests and who 320 has been poo-pooed at times as out of control noisy.


I could post examples here, but I don't think it's needed. Those of you wanting to use 320 and having issues can try this yourselves easily to check my findings. I've tested this now in a number of controlled tests and I'm getting 100% clean results now with 320 as long as I avoid 1250 and 640 when coming down from the higher ISOs.


Yes, it's irritating having to do this to begin with, but it's still a MUCH faster start then our RED, and in fact, to my eye 320 is the sweet spot for noise/color on this little miracle camera, so I'm pleased to have a consistent fix for the issue.
 
Last edited:
He's saying avoid 1250 and 640 when switching ISO's down to 320, and I just did it, seems like he's right. Need more people to test, though.

Just don't test by closing or opening your aperture, use the shutter and a static shot the judge.

Begs the question, which way do you go to 1600 and does it make a difference? Or, how do you go down to 640 to get cleaner footage?

Edit here: Doesn't just seem like he's right, he's absolutely right... So, again, now... how do you know which way to go to use cleaner ,higher ISO's?
 
Stevet. What I mean is that whether you're heading to 640 by way of 1600, or 320 by way of 800 (or 1600) you need to click your way down there without touching 1250 or 640.

So click from 1600 to 800 to 640. But not 1600 to 1250 to 640.

Click from 800 to 400 to 320. But not from 800 to 640 to 320.

And so on.

I'm really pleased to have destroyed my night of sleep last night sussing this out, as I love the look of 320 but kept getting burned and it wasn't adding up.
 
Last edited:
Kholi said:
He's saying avoid 1250 and 640 when switching ISO's down to 320, and I just did it, seems like he's right. Need more people to test, though.

Just don't test by closing or opening your aperture, use the shutter and a static shot the judge.

Begs the question, which way do you go to 1600 and does it make a difference? Or, how do you go down to 640 to get cleaner footage?

Edit here: Doesn't just seem like he's right, he's absolutely right... So, again, now... how do you know which way to go to use cleaner ,higher ISO's?
Click to expand...

Well, to me the issue is solved by making a preset that always starts at 1600. Then just click your way to 1250 (one click) or 640 or 320 the correct route and you're good.

Again, no matter how you look at it, it's still a much faster start than many cameras.
 
PaPa said:
Hmm, im slightly confused.
Click to expand...

When you go from 800 to 320, when you click from one to the other, you must click either past 640 OR 400 to get to 320.

If you click past 640 you will get a very noisy (as has been reported many times) 320.

But if you click past 400 you will get a very clean 320.
 
Cosimo Bullo said:
Well, to me the issue is solved by making a preset that always starts at 1600. Then just click your way to 1250 (one click) or 640 or 320 the correct route and you're good.

Again, no matter how you look at it, it's still a much faster start than many cameras.
Click to expand...

I meant what if you want to use 640, 800, or 1600? Then what's the order?
 
Well I don't think the bug is a problem for 800 or 1600 so you can go to it any which way. For 640 come down from 800 with one click, or from 1600 by way of 800 (but not by way of 1250).

personally, I'm not using 800 or 1600, as 640 and 1250 seem cleaner to my eye (when arrived at in the proper, admittedly ridiculous sequence...)
 
Excellent find. Another way of looking at it is to always move left and right only along the second row of ISOs ie 200, 400, 800, 1600, 3200 and push up to select your desired ISO and never move horizontally on the top row.
 
Dazza said:
Excellent find. Another way of looking at it is to always move left and right only along the second row of ISOs ie 200, 400, 800, 1600, 3200 and push up to select your desired ISO and never move horizontally on the top row.
Click to expand...

That's a great way of thinking about it. But start with a high ISO like 1600 to be safe, I'd think.
 
Damn! I wish i read this earlier before my shoot today.. It was the first time I had been carefully selecting 320 and 640'as well. Glad i'm not used to it yet thanks to this discovery.
Good detective work!
 
Dazza said:
Excellent find. Another way of looking at it is to always move left and right only along the second row of ISOs ie 200, 400, 800, 1600, 3200 and push up to select your desired ISO and never move horizontally on the top row.
Click to expand...

That's the simple solution. This should be in a sticky on basic GH2 use.
 
If you power down using 320 & 640, you still have to move up and back down again every time - is this still correct? Only on those two? Read this a few times and just want to make sure since new discoveries are still being made.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top