550D/GH13 comparision shot

Kholi said:
Post the full frame.
Click to expand...

Here is a crop shot with the 18-55 kit lens. Granted it is from a still shot and not an HD mov. but it is only about 15% of the total picture area and shows the kit lens is relatively focused. I'm just not convinced that your out of focus shot represents the whole story. I'd like to see a more accurate comparison between the two cameras. Hell, if it is as big of a difference as your two samples illustrate, I'll get a GH-1 tomorrow. (When they change the codec)
 

Attachments

  • 15%-frame-grab-18-55mm-kit-lens.jpg
    15%-frame-grab-18-55mm-kit-lens.jpg
    109.7 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
Kholi said:
This is the exact reason why I got rid of my GH1 last year. No monitoring is very tough for production. I do have faith that Vitaily will bring it, though.

It's a major concern, regardless.

That'll pretty much complete the camera for me once it gets here.
Click to expand...

I agree, if the images I'm seeing out of the GH13 can be as good as they look and I can have my 1st ac pull focus off a monitor with the cam I'm buying one today. Heck I may even sell my t2i for a 7d before then just to get full 1080 out for better focusing...
 
My Dad can kick your Dad's ass.





That about sums up this whole debate for me. Get out there and use what you have. I don't care if you make a movie with the new iPhone 4. If it's captivating, I'll watch it.

MAH
 
Kholi said:
Pick your poison... but neither is better. Each is a VASTLY different image to my eye. The GH13 looks more like EX1 with a massive sensor. It's pristine and almost glass-like if you see it on a large screen.
Click to expand...

Agreed...in fact that's why I feel like the Gh1 actually cuts a little better with the EX1 and the Canons cut a little better with the HVX. Although the GH1 does cut nicely with the HVX as well.
 
HDkilledFILM. said:
I wonder, for how many this will be the deal breaker? I know that the t2i doesn't do full 1080 out (neither does the 5d2, the 7d does) but if you use any crane/jib or stedicam set up an external monitor is something that you need...
Click to expand...
It is a serious issue, yes. We got a crane shot in Shady, Texas and it really was pretty much "aim and pray"; not the way I like to work! As near as I can tell, it's really the last area where the Canons are clearly superior. Having monitoring of any type makes certain shots possible, and others impractical or even impossible.

Of course, if people want to find a solution badly enough, one will always present itself; there's some device that looks in on the viewfinder with a little security camera, and broadcasts it wirelessly to a receiver, so ... for those shots where you really need to have remote eyes on the scene, you can at least get *something*.
 
Barry_Green said:
It is a serious issue, yes. We got a crane shot in Shady, Texas and it really was pretty much "aim and pray"; not the way I like to work! As near as I can tell, it's really the last area where the Canons are clearly superior. Having monitoring of any type makes certain shots possible, and others impractical or even impossible.

Of course, if people want to find a solution badly enough, one will always present itself; there's some device that looks in on the viewfinder with a little security camera, and broadcasts it wirelessly to a receiver, so ... for those shots where you really need to have remote eyes on the scene, you can at least get *something*.
Click to expand...

Saw Vitaily (I never know if I'm spelling his name right) asking for video resolutions for HDMI out. Could it be the next thing to pop up!?

=D
 
ROCKMORE said:
Here is a crop shot with the 18-55 kit lens. Granted it is from a still shot and not an HD mov. but it is only about 15% of the total picture area and shows the kit lens is relatively focused. I'm just not convinced that your out of focus shot represents the whole story. I'd like to see a more accurate comparison between the two cameras. Hell, if it is as big of a difference as your two samples illustrate, I'll get a GH-1 tomorrow. (When they change the codec)
Click to expand...

I didn't post those. But just go over to the GH13 forum and look at Hunters comparisons with the hack enabled.

Vs the MKii no less.

It's very evident that the GH1 is a clearer image, even I see that walking around with the hack in my hands. You just need to decide if you want real HD footage or "somewhat" HD footage.

I think we've long since known that "Somewhat" HD footage has its own appeal. HVX, I'm looking at you.
 
Kholi said:
Really? Where's your comparison at?

I'm gonna take a wild guess and say you haven't even touched a hacked GH1.
Click to expand...




Well I at least know before the GH1 "hack" that the t2i is better in low light . Now if concrete evidence is showed that now the Gh1 is better than that would be just one more reason to look at the Gh1.

The two most important things for me is Live monitoring and crop factor. Even if there is a patch somehow to allow live monitor out ( even sd ) I honestly have no idea how I would get around the crop factor as finding wide lenses are very difficult for crop cameras.

I need wide as I usually film very wide capturing my subjects from feet to their head. Can someone post an example of a wide lens that could do this for the Gh1?

thanks
 
Cieloent said:
Well I at least know before the GH1 "hack" that the t2i is better in low light . Now if concrete evidence is showed that now the Gh1 is better than that would be just one more reason to look at the Gh1.
Click to expand...

At the same ISOs and apertures, the GH1 is consistently faster than all of the canon cameras. The issue was FPN in lowlit situations, which is a bit more tamed now with the hack.

Some people shoot differently, if you have to shoot above 800 ISO on a DSLR then you probably should be rethinking your setup. Real world experience with all of the cameras here.

The two most important things for me is Live monitoring and crop factor. Even if there is a patch somehow to allow live monitor out ( even sd ) I honestly have no idea how I would get around the crop factor as finding wide lenses are very difficult for crop cameras.
Click to expand...

It's 4mm off of RED. Yes, some people will make a big deal about the 4mm difference, the reality of it is it's close enough to the 7D and T2i to make little difference.

The 11-16/2.8 Tokina is probably the fastest you can get CHEAPLY for both the GH1 and T2i.

It'll be about a 14-15mm at the wide end on a GH1.

The 5D is the camera that gets wide for cheap, T2i, 7d and Gh1 are all in the same bracket.

Live Monitoring is a heavy consideration, hope it makes it. With the way he's working, though, I don't have much doubt.

I need wide as I usually film very wide capturing my subjects from feet to their head. Can someone post an example of a wide lens that could do this for the Gh1?

thanks
Click to expand...

The 11-16/2.8 Tokina or the 7-14/4 Panasonic Zoom.

Again, the T2i's recorded image is not that much larger than the GH1's recorded video image. The difference is in still modes.
 
The GH1 may have the advantage right now, but I think all you Canon haters out there know that the images presented in this thread are hardly indicative of the IQ of the T2i/7D.

I have shot a lot with the 7D, and even in 720, I have only got images that atrocious when I screwed up. Generally speaking, the images are really nice, otherwise numerous professional would not have purchased Canon in the first place.

If Canon were truly that crappy, I doubt House and numerous other productions would have chose Canon to shoot their show. We just did a spot for HGTV and we used the 7D for several shots, and they look great. The client was stoked.
 
I don't think people here are haters of either cam (the other way around, lovers of all things that have come into being over the past 5 years or so...) but maybe I'm wrong. People just want to argue that they have the better cam. I got my hands on hacked GH13 today... Wow. Look all I'm saying is it is sharper. The t2i still looks good to me, just not as good... And like I said before, for me live monitoring is a deal breaker... but WOW.
 
Look all I'm saying is it is sharper. The t2i still looks good to me, just not as good...
Click to expand...
That may be true for stuff shot in the middle of the afternoon, but what about low light? As in, highway at night, city at night, suburban street at night, not just indoors in less-than-optimal lighting. I'm very curious to see a good comparison.
 
HDkilledFILM. said:
I don't think people here are haters of either cam (the other way around, lovers of all things that have come into being over the past 5 years or so...) but maybe I'm wrong. People just want to argue that they have the better cam. I got my hands on hacked GH13 today... Wow. Look all I'm saying is it is sharper. The t2i still looks good to me, just not as good... And like I said before, for me live monitoring is a deal breaker... but WOW.
Click to expand...

Stop being a hater!
 
tylerrad said:
That may be true for stuff shot in the middle of the afternoon, but what about low light? As in, highway at night, city at night, suburban street at night, not just indoors in less-than-optimal lighting. I'm very curious to see a good comparison.
Click to expand...

Isn't this a contradiction? You're asking to go from one horrible lighting situation to another. I still don't get the obsession with shooting under street lamps...

It doesn't look cool, awesome or good. It just looks like someone didn't have money so they shot under street lamps...

In any case, anything sub RED MX at this point looks like crap in that situation. Canons are no exception.
 
That's not exclusively (or really at all) what I'm talking about. Though I'm not sure what you mean when you say:
It just looks like someone didn't have money so they shot under street lamps...
Click to expand...
Money for what? A big light kit to drag out into the street in lieu of shooting under street lights? Or money to find a location that doesn't involve a street or streetlights at all? Either way, it's an impertinent response. The fact is, some locations are impossible to shoot with anything but available light.

And I'm not talking about high noon when I say "the middle of the afternoon" -- I simply mean a situation where there is plenty of available light, i.e. outside in the daytime, or inside in the daytime in a room with lots of windows, etc. If you only like to shoot in situations where a entire light kit can be brought in and set up exactly, I'm not going to say that's wrong or bad, but that's not how I shoot. I have two specific critical shots for an upcoming short film, both outdoors, both at night, both in very peculiar locations (under a bridge on the water, and below an interstate overpass) where only ambient light (in both cases emanating from city centers) is available. For those situations, as well as for many, many others I could contrive, low light, high ISO performance is absolutely crucial. Whether I buy a T2i or a GH1 will depend of whether I can be convinced that the GH1's low light performance -- which, without the hack, is unimpressive, bordering on bad/unusable -- has been markedly improved by the Tester 13 hack. I'm already convinced that the T2i's low-light performance, with the right lenses, is more than serviceable.

I'm not the kind of person who posts tens of videos on Vimeo of nothing -- people milling around beneath streetlights, flowers shot in shallow focus, etc. I will have specific, practical purposes for the camera I choose -- and I use this forum looking for advice/information to help decide which tool might fit my purpose best. I'm not asking for a commentary on whether it's good or bad to shoot with available light at night, streetlights or otherwise being the source
 
Last edited:
HDkilledFILM. said:
I don't think people here are haters of either cam (the other way around, lovers of all things that have come into being over the past 5 years or so...) but maybe I'm wrong. People just want to argue that they have the better cam. I got my hands on hacked GH13 today... Wow. Look all I'm saying is it is sharper. The t2i still looks good to me, just not as good... And like I said before, for me live monitoring is a deal breaker... but WOW.
Click to expand...

I completely agree with the first part.
But for me it's all about image quality at an affordable price, and in this price range, from the little I've seen, the GH13 is KILLING IT!
I love what I've been able to do with my Canons and don't regret getting them one bit. My biggest investment is in lenses anyway, so I'm ready to upgrade my 7Ds when Canon's next gen cams are out.
But... for now I've got to hustle up some cash for a couple of GH1s :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top