AF100 shows more aliasing and less resolution than Panasonic GH2 ?

Noel Evans said:
Have you gone out and shot with one? Might answer your question.
Click to expand...

This was the essence of my post to the thread pointed at in my opening post of this thread :-)

However the implications of the slashcam.de inhouse tests are so important, that a follow up should not be neglected. Listen Barry ?
 
danap said:
However the implications of the slashcam.de inhouse tests are so important, that a follow up should not be neglected. Listen Barry ?
Click to expand...

If they're so important, maybe you should do the tests instead of relying someone else to do them for you and provide you with conclusions. It seems a little rude to create a thread that seemingly only exists to call out an expert for his opinion on a topic you find interesting.
 
People can do what they like, there's no arm twisting. I havent shot a single image on the af100 that I havent looked at and thought, now thats pretty.
 
Finnegan said:
If they're so important, maybe you should do the tests instead of relying someone else to do them for you and provide you with conclusions. It seems a little rude to create a thread that seemingly only exists to call out an expert for his opinion on a topic you find interesting.
Click to expand...

Agree in theory on the first part of the quote above. It is not a matter of life and death. I disagree gently on adjective used in the last sentence, but agree on the fact hat there might be more than one expert out there :-)

Yes more testing under stricter conditions is needed. Unfortunately I own only an AF01, a GH13 and a 5D Mark II, and no GH2.
 
I think the main issue was based on the following below. I'm no expert on this but I won't question the validity of the tests. It seems like a completely fair evaluation.

GH2
911-ISO340-ISO340.jpg

AF100
922-ISO340-14-42_ISO340.jpg
 
AF100's OLP filter is there right to lessen aliasing.
GH2 has a far more moderate filter, then it should show a lot more video aliasing than AF100...

Assuming that Germans have made a fair test, I wonder what's the reason for this frustrating AF100 behaviour?
 
Mis-information spreads like wild-fire on the web, which is why this issue needs to be properly investigated, then published and finally put to bed.

I don't trust this german test because few details are given about their procedure, or even if they have competence at understanding and adjusting the AF-100 camera settings.
 
Slashcam has a long history testing consumer to prosumer video cameras (and later DSLRs) and a stable workflow to do so. Is it true GH2 and AF100 teams worked pretty much independently from each other on these 2 cameras?
 
Perhaps they took a still image with the GH2 and a video frame with AF100. If you would take a video frame with the GH2 it would look probably the same. They say also that the aliasing with the AF100 is much better than with DSLR.
 
MrSeth said:
I think the main issue was based on the following below. I'm no expert on this but I won't question the validity of the tests. It seems like a completely fair evaluation.

GH2
911-ISO340-ISO340.jpg

AF100
922-ISO340-14-42_ISO340.jpg
Click to expand...

I'm not saying the test is wrong, as I don't know. But I do know that SlashCam has come up with some very dubious results in the past. For example, look at the HV-20 compared the the EX-3 at 1200 LUX. The HV-20 looks better; I'm sorry but that's just not right.

http://camcorder-test.slashcam.com/campair-EN.shtml

Also it's been noted before that the AF needs its sharpening to be turned way down. If they didn't do that, you're going to see a lot aliasing on a circular patter.
 
As Gugulio states:

Perhaps they took a still image with the GH2 and a video frame with AF100
Click to expand...
Genious Gugulino! This is a serious possibility that should be investigated. Ideally the test should be redone under fully controlled conditions.
 
Last edited:
BobbyMurcerFan said:
Also it's been noted before that the AF needs its sharpening to be turned way down. If they didn't do that, you're going to see a lot aliasing on a circular patter.
Click to expand...
AF100 alias is there, both in the concentric rings of the circular pattern and in the sloped resolution lines while GH2 hardly shows very few harmonics in the densest rings.
That's a real mistery.
 
Gugulino said:
Perhaps they took a still image with the GH2 and a video frame with AF100. If you would take a video frame with the GH2 it would look probably the same. They say also that the aliasing with the AF100 is much better than with DSLR.
Click to expand...

Likely hypothesis
 
It is not a still image from GH2. Their statement to the AF100 ISO chart is: ' The ISO chart reveals slight scaling artefacts from sensor. Compared to DSLR standard, the picture is good, though being slightly below the one from GH2.'
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top