7D vs GH1 definition/sharpness comparison

C

Caesar

Active member
Which one does it offer better results?

Can someone point me some comparison tests or charts online about?

My main interest is static (tripod) wide shots.
 
GH-1. The primary issues for me are: Compression/Codec and no Video Out.

Otherwise, it's the winner.

I really hope Panasonic kicks themselves in the ass and gets the next one closer.
 
If someone gave Trammel Hudson a GH-1 to hack and if I thought it was possible I'd been on that boat a long time ago. But like Kholi, the ONLY quams I have with the GH-1 are the compression/codec and video out. In every other area the camera is the winner. That includes 720/p and ever so slightly(if that) 1080p. I know folks will say...mudd is not an issue...but for me...that and the banding issues are it for me. Panasonic came so close but screwed up the most important thing in my book. It's funny...I never thought I'd say a Panasonic cam in this price range was sharper than ANY other cam in the same range. Just as they seemed to get that right...the codec kicks me in the gonads. If it isn't one thing it's another.

I think though, in terms of real world sharpness, we have not seen a lot of what the 7D can do. It seems to be very different from the GH-1 and folks have been shooting very flat and dull. But lately I've been seeing a lot sharper images coming from this cam. Like This for example:


Unfortunately I missed the UPS guy today so I will be picking up my cam on Monday.
 
Ian-T said:
But like Kholi, the ONLY quams I have with the GH-1 are the compression/codec and video out. In every other area the camera is the winner.
Click to expand...
Agreed with both of you. Those are the two shortcomings of the GH1, and (unfortunately for the Panasonic) they're big ones. Other than those two problems, the GH1 is just better than the Canon. But for digi-cine use, those two are huge factors and make the Canon the better choice.
 
Don't forget crop factor. I really like the fact that the 7D matches super-35 FOV and DOF characterisitics. Finding good fast wide glass is tricky enough on APS-C, it's very tough on u4/3.
 
Well, the 7D doesn't match Super35, it matches regular 35. And the difference between the 7D and GH1, in terms of sensor size, isn't all that much. There's a difference, yes, but Micro 4/3 is 18mm wide, 7D is 22mm wide.
 
Barry_Green said:
Well, the 7D doesn't match Super35, it matches regular 35. And the difference between the 7D and GH1, in terms of sensor size, isn't all that much. There's a difference, yes, but Micro 4/3 is 18mm wide, 7D is 22mm wide.
Click to expand...

You are right. My bad. At 22.3 mm wide, the 7D is closer to regular 35 (21.95mm) than s35 (24.89mm).

However, I do consider a ~20% FOV difference between APS-C and u4/3 significant.

For instance, getting the equivalent FOV and max. aperture of an APS-C Tokina 11-16 2.8 in u4/3 appears to be impossible at the moment.

I also can't find an equivalent to the Canon 17-55 IS 2.8 or Tamron 17-50 VC (my favourite focal range for a fast-ish zoom). Closest would be Olympus 14-35 f2.0 which doesn't have IS.

-X
 
xbourque said:
You are right. My bad. At 22.3 mm wide, the 7D is closer to regular 35 (21.95mm) than s35 (24.89mm).

However, I do consider a ~20% FOV difference between APS-C and u4/3 significant.

For instance, getting the equivalent FOV and max. aperture of an APS-C Tokina 11-16 2.8 in u4/3 appears to be impossible at the moment.

I also can't find an equivalent to the Canon 17-55 IS 2.8 or Tamron 17-50 VC (my favourite focal range for a fast-ish zoom). Closest would be Olympus 14-35 f2.0 which doesn't have IS.

-X
Click to expand...

the 7-14mm should actually be a little wider for micro 4/3 but it isn't quite as fast. the aps-c size is an advantage but then again the μ4/3 format also allows you to mount any lens you want (with an adapter).
 
killacam said:
but it isn't quite as fast.
Click to expand...

That was my point. And you can't screw filters on it.

killacam said:
the aps-c size is an advantage but then again the μ4/3 format also allows you to mount any lens you want (with an adapter).
Click to expand...

Granted that the short focal flange distance of u4/3 makes it ideal to adapt all sorts of lenses to it. However, since adapters are passive, you lose stabilisation on non-4/3 IS lenses. You also do not have aperture control on Canon EF lenses... rendering them pretty much unuseable on the GH1.

I'm just saying that when comparing 7D and GH1, FOV, DOF and available lens options must be considered. For better (cheap FD lenses!) and worse (trickier at the wide end, need for faster lenses to achieve same DOF).
 
xbourque said:
That was my point. And you can't screw filters on it.



Granted that the short focal flange distance of u4/3 makes it ideal to adapt all sorts of lenses to it. However, since adapters are passive, you lose stabilisation on non-4/3 IS lenses. You also do not have aperture control on Canon EF lenses... rendering them pretty much unuseable on the GH1.

I'm just saying that when comparing 7D and GH1, FOV, DOF and available lens options must be considered. For better (cheap FD lenses!) and worse (trickier at the wide end, need for faster lenses to achieve same DOF).
Click to expand...

oh I took your "no equivalent fov" as separate and not in combination with the other requirements. yeah, the tokina is pretty unique for a zoom, especially that wide, since most are in the 3.5-4.5 range. I didn't consider it that big of a deal though since you're unlikely to achieve any kind of shallow DOF that wide even wide open. I didn't realize that about the filter thread. I did know the canon 10-22 doesn't take filters either though.

and is IS considered a good thing for video? I thought that was under debate. I've heard the lens tries to overcompensate for movement when handheld. also it seems based on the thread above that it makes a loud clicking noise in video mode. some people have recommended turning it off during video.
 
I consider IS a very useful feature for video. Perhaps even more useful than for stills. Since modern cameras are clean at pretty high ISOs, you can use fast shutter speeds even in lower light, rendering IS less critical.

In video, if it's shaky, it looks shaky, no matter how good the camera is at ISO 1600. Micro-jitters are even more annoying in cameras that have rolling shutters, like the current crop of DSLRs.

True that stabilizers are picked up by on-board mics in very quiet environments, but so is any handling noise. If you're concerned about audio quality, you shouldn't be using on-board mics in the first place.
 
xbourque said:
I consider IS a very useful feature for video. Perhaps even more useful than for stills. Since modern cameras are clean at pretty high ISOs, you can use fast shutter speeds even in lower light, rendering IS less critical.

In video, if it's shaky, it looks shaky, no matter how good the camera is at ISO 1600. Micro-jitters are even more annoying in cameras that have rolling shutters, like the current crop of DSLRs.

True that stabilizers are picked up by on-board mics in very quiet environments, but so is any handling noise. If you're concerned about audio quality, you shouldn't be using on-board mics in the first place.
Click to expand...

well that's good to know that you think IS works for reducing shake. I did notice those micro jitters in some 7d footage. the opinion seemed split on IS when I looked at it previously: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=784273

wouldn't that stabilization still be picked up by a hot shoe mounted audio recorder? or is it okay since the mics are aimed away from the camera.
 
We're veering off-topic and I don't have enough experience with hot-shoe mounted mics (or recorders) to help you. I suggest you start a topic and see what the fine folks around here have to say.
 
xbourque said:
We're veering off-topic and I don't have enough experience with hot-shoe mounted mics (or recorders) to help you. I suggest you start a topic and see what the fine folks around here have to say.
Click to expand...

well the point was that noise from IS still might be a problem and shouldn't be dismissed so easily. anyway I don't think you can go wrong with either the 7d or gh1. both are very good cameras and I would actually pick both over the 5d (for now).
 
The GH1 is definitely sharper, in wides, but the 7D is just a more robust image overall. It drives me crazy. I want these two cameras to have sex and create the right camera child we all want. The 7D is soft in wides.. it just is... but it holds up better.. the image is 'thicker' some how.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top