Beginner's GH1 Questions?

[Homunculus]

Hi everyone, just like many people I've been coming down with the Gh1 craze after the hack was discovered. However I'm pretty new to cameras in general and their terminology so was wondering if you guys can help answer some random questions for me.


1. My first concern was the following: I don't have the money to purchase canon 5Dii at the moment but I was wondering whether I should save up instead of buying the Gh1 now. One of the concerns is megapixels. Why is there such a large disparity and how does the seemingly low MP count affect the Gh1? (Gh1 has around 12 MP to Canon 5Dii's 20+)

2. For introduction into indie film making, what are 'must have' lenses that I should have, to cover all my bases in GENERAL for most of the type of shots and settings that a filmmaker needs for the majority of shoots? The kit lens apparently covers a good amount because I'm assuming at lowest focal lengths it has decently wide shots and then has good zoom, etc. But how about other things like Depth of Field which is important? I want to be able to do very shallow DoF shots where only the subject is in focus, will I be able to do such things with the kit lens or do I have to buy a different one? And how can I tell which lenses are compatible with a Gh1 and which aren't? For example what does the micro 4/3rds thing mean anyway?

3. Will a complete camera noob who's never owned anything better than a "cybershot" 100$ type of camera before be able to successfully do the tester13 hack? Does the hack require some sort of special memory card? I seem to have read it perhaps requires a higher level card and perhaps is not feasible on the stock kit memory card, is this true?

4. What sort of sound management will I require after purchasing of a Gh1 to be able to make good starter indie films. What sort of bare essential sound equipment is recommended? Something like a Zoom H4 connected to a shotgun mic of some sort will get me far? Or do you recommend a different starter setup?

5. What basic software can be used to color correct? How are people color correcting out there? I'm assuming it's not just photoshop or something along those lines...

6. Any other BASIC things I should be looking into investing? Some sort of DP light kit perhaps with basic lights or what?

I guess that's it for now but if I think of more questions I'll post them.

Thanks.

 

[Exact]

Hi everyone, just like many people I've been coming down with the Gh1 craze after the hack was discovered. However I'm pretty new to cameras in general and their terminology so was wondering if you guys can help answer some random questions for me.


1. My first concern was the following: I don't have the money to purchase canon 5Dii at the moment but I was wondering whether I should save up instead of buying the Gh1 now. One of the concerns is megapixels. Why is there such a large disparity and how does the seemingly low MP count affect the Gh1? (Gh1 has around 12 MP to Canon 5Dii's 20+)

The number of mega pixels should (in theory) only affect the quality of the stills. However, that's not the whole story. The 5D2 has a bigger sensor too, and this affects DOF and also light gathering abilities. In some ways the 5D2's extra megapixels are counter productive for video because of 'pixel binning'. The 5D2 has to throw away many more pixels than the GH1 in order to get down to the 1920x1080 size for HD video. This can lead to more aliasing (stair step lines etc) on the 5D2 in 'some' circumstances.

From a stills camera point of view the 5D2 is streets ahead of the GH1 in terms of quality of output, but don't confuse stills with video. From a video point of view the GH1 has quite a few advantages, not least (for the beginner at least) AF capability. In terms of manual settings, the GH1 is easy to use whereas the 5D2 takes a little more work. In terms of the quality of video output, until recently the 5D2 was ahead of the GH1 for out-of-the-box quality, but the GH13 hack has made up much of the ground, and possibly over taken it in some areas. It would have been nice if the Zacuto shootout had used the GH13 hack instead of the standard firmware.

2. For introduction into indie film making, what are 'must have' lenses that I should have, to cover all my bases in GENERAL for most of the type of shots and settings that a filmmaker needs for the majority of shoots? The kit lens apparently covers a good amount because I'm assuming at lowest focal lengths it has decently wide shots and then has good zoom, etc. But how about other things like Depth of Field which is important? I want to be able to do very shallow DoF shots where only the subject is in focus, will I be able to do such things with the kit lens or do I have to buy a different one? And how can I tell which lenses are compatible with a Gh1 and which aren't? For example what does the micro 4/3rds thing mean anyway?

4/3rds is the sensor aspect ratio. One of the primary attractions of the micro 4/3 system is that almost any lens can be adapted to it, so if you could use it on a 5D2, or a Nikon or on many of the other cameras out there - you can use it on the GH1 as well. This gives the GH1 many more lens options that almost any other camera you could think of.

What lenses to get ..... Hmmm... this is as much personal preference as anything else. If you are looking for truly shallow depth of field (most people think they want this - but then find it hard to work with) then the kit lens is not the best choice. You need to be looking at the various adapters that are available (cheaply on e-bay) for lenses such are Nikon, Canon FD, Leica R & M etc etc. Also, look at the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 for indoor low light capability. Once you have the adapters you can pick up relatively cheap glass to cover your bases - but what glass you need really does depend on what you shoot. The glass I would choose in order to cover my bases may be different to yours, because our shooting styles and subjects could be completely different.

3. Will a complete camera noob who's never owned anything better than a "cybershot" 100$ type of camera before be able to successfully do the tester13 hack? Does the hack require some sort of special memory card? I seem to have read it perhaps requires a higher level card and perhaps is not feasible on the stock kit memory card, is this true?

The hack is easy. You get the original firmware file and the hack software. You run the hack software (in windows) and choose the options you want. You then save this new firmware to a regular memory card (format this in the camera first). Once you turn on the camera, press play and it will ask you if you want to update the firmware. A couple of mins later and you are done.

4. What sort of sound management will I require after purchasing of a Gh1 to be able to make good starter indie films. What sort of bare essential sound equipment is recommended? Something like a Zoom H4 connected to a shotgun mic of some sort will get me far? Or do you recommend a different starter setup?

Zoom H4N + a good shotgun mic is a good starter kit.

5. What basic software can be used to color correct? How are people color correcting out there? I'm assuming it's not just photoshop or something along those lines...

It depends on what computer system you are running. Windows or Mac? No point telling you all the options and then finding out you don't have the right computer. Typical options include Sony Vegas, Adobe Premiere, Final Cut Studio, Adobe After Effects.

6. Any other BASIC things I should be looking into investing? Some sort of DP light kit perhaps with basic lights or what?

The other things you need to invest in depend entirely on what type of shooting you are thinking about. If you are doing a lot of indoor shooting then lighting is a good idea. A reasonable tripod is a must. Don't skimp too much here or you'll end up throwing it away and buying something better fairly quickly.

DON'T be tempted to skimp on memory cards. Buy good quality cards from a REPUTABLE dealer. DO NOT BUY FROM E-BAY.

Don't forget you will also need additional batteries. The hack will let you use none Panasonic batteries.

 

[Homunculus]

Thanks a lot for your response. They were very informative. A few more questions I thought of if you don't mind. I've been doing a lot of nonstop research. One thing that comes to mind is this jello effect i.e. rolling shutter that I hear of. How bad is this really and how often does it come in? I saw a video where it was literally omnipresent in the entire length of every single shot that was shot at zoom and moved (panned) even slightly. Is this an enormous problem? The video was dated 2009, is this perhaps an older model of Gh1 or something?

2. You said that 5D2 is way ahead of Gh1 in stills. I plan to use it for stills as well though. Is GH1 really bad for stills, can it still shoot good still photography or is it mostly worthless in this respect compared to its larger chipped competitors like 5d2? I mean I'm sure it's better than my 6.0MP 100$ digital piece of crap, but let's say I was buying the GH1 just for stills, would it be worth it?

3. You brought up a good point with memory cards. I realized I have no idea how much data is taken up by common videos on these DSLR's because I've never owned one. What's a good memory card size to get and how much memory does a video take up? Let's say I shoot a 5 minute video how much memory would that roughly take up on the card? (Or use any length for an example, 1 min vid etc?)

4. You said the hack is easy but you said "choose the settings you want" but how can I know what I want if I'm a complete noob and don't even know what the settings mean...lol, that's kind of what I meant about whether I will be able to do it or not. Or are they straight forward settings? I'm not really familiar with what settings will be given to me yet...

Thanks again

 

[Homunculus]

p.s. I can't seem to find any galleries of photos/stills taken with GH1 as the focus in the search results always seems to be video. Does anyone know where I can view photos taken from Gh1 to see how they look?

Thanks.

 

[Exact]

p.s. I can't seem to find any galleries of photos/stills taken with GH1 as the focus in the search results always seems to be video. Does anyone know where I can view photos taken from Gh1 to see how they look?

Thanks.

Go to DPReview and read the review of the camera - there are quite a few there.

 

[Exact]

Thanks a lot for your response. They were very informative. A few more questions I thought of if you don't mind. I've been doing a lot of nonstop research. One thing that comes to mind is this jello effect i.e. rolling shutter that I hear of. How bad is this really and how often does it come in? I saw a video where it was literally omnipresent in the entire length of every single shot that was shot at zoom and moved (panned) even slightly. Is this an enormous problem? The video was dated 2009, is this perhaps an older model of Gh1 or something?

Jello is something that can be induced if you want it - or almost completely avoided if you want to. It's how you shoot. If you want to do quick pans, you could see jello, depending on 'what' you are shooting (i.e. lots of vertical lines / railings etc).

I don't do fast pans and leave those to the amateurs. One of the first things you notice about amateur footage is the fast pan/random zoom/shaky footage. Learn to 'not' do these and your footage will not only dramatically improve over night, but you probably will never see any objectionable jello either.

I'm not saying you will never see it, or that it will never be a problem, but you can certainly choose to shoot in ways that will keep it to an absolute minimum rather than shooting 'to show how bad it can be'. Every camera with a CMOS censor will have this to some extent. The GH1 is better than most.

2. You said that 5D2 is way ahead of Gh1 in stills. I plan to use it for stills as well though. Is GH1 really bad for stills, can it still shoot good still photography or is it mostly worthless in this respect compared to its larger chipped competitors like 5d2? I mean I'm sure it's better than my 6.0MP 100$ digital piece of crap, but let's say I was buying the GH1 just for stills, would it be worth it?

I should perhaps clarify that I shoot stills professionally as well as video, so I'm looking at things super critically - especially for stock photos. The GH1 is a great stills camera for most people, and most people will never question it's abilities, so take what I said with a pinch of salt if you are not looking to submit to stock libraries etc. It's a lot better than the $100 Point & Shoot, but it's not going to match a good $5,000 setup.

3. You brought up a good point with memory cards. I realized I have no idea how much data is taken up by common videos on these DSLR's because I've never owned one. What's a good memory card size to get and how much memory does a video take up? Let's say I shoot a 5 minute video how much memory would that roughly take up on the card? (Or use any length for an example, 1 min vid etc?)

Much depends on the settings you use. I shoot most of my video on HMC cameras with 16GB cards and can get 101 minutes on each card. The HMc bit rate is higher than the default GH1 bit rate, so the GH1 should get longer than this. However, I've increased the bit rate on the GH1 so I now expect to get less than that. How much less that that? Don't know yet since I haven't actually filled a 16GB card on the GH1 without offloading first.

In terms of what size cards you should buy - it really depends on your style of shooting. If you are shooting in short bursts then 8GB cards should be plenty. I often need to record for an hour at a time so 8GB would not be enough, hence I went for 16GB. Other card sizes are 32GB and 64GB but unless you know you need these, stick with the smaller cards for now. There is less to lose if you lose / break the card.

4. You said the hack is easy but you said "choose the settings you want" but how can I know what I want if I'm a complete noob and don't even know what the settings mean...lol, that's kind of what I meant about whether I will be able to do it or not. Or are they straight forward settings? I'm not really familiar with what settings will be given to me yet...

Much depends on where you are. For instance, there is an option to allow 3rd party batteries, so that's likely to be one that you check. After that, if you are in a PAL area you will want to select the option to remove the 30 minute recording time limit (not a problem in NTSC areas). After that the three settings you will want to change are likely to be the bit rate, and there are a couple of threads on this forum dedicated to all these settings so I'm not going to replicate them here. Once you have your camera in hand, there will be a lot of people willing to help you through this. So, it's not something you should worry about too much

 

[Ben_B]

p.s. I can't seem to find any galleries of photos/stills taken with GH1 as the focus in the search results always seems to be video. Does anyone know where I can view photos taken from Gh1 to see how they look?

Thanks.

http://www.flickr.com/cameras/panasonic/dmc-gh1/

 

[Homunculus]

thanks again for the responses guys they have been very helpful.


I'd like to ask you all something not directly related to the GH1 but just cameras in general, information that will help me perhaps choose a lens for the GH1 and such.

Through my research recently I have learned most of the terminology for example ISO is for light conditions, you use higher ISO for low light conditions, low ISO like 50-100 for normal or bright light conditions.
MM I understand as the distance between the end of the lens and the aperture or the chip (can't remember which) but basically means that the higher the MM the more zoom or close angle the shot is whereas the lower the mm the wider angle the shot.
The F1.8 stuff as I understand is the f-stop and refers to the size of the aperture opening. F22 is a tiny aperture hole meant for huge depth of field and F1.8 or something like that is a huge opened aperture meant for super shallow depth of field where only the subject is in focus.
The thing I DON'T understand though is shutter speed and in what situations should that be adjusted? And secondly, how does that relate to the f-stops and why are low f-stop lenses called "fast lenses"? I would assume it's perhaps because when an aperture is opened all the way that means it's letting in a ton of light and so the shutter speed has to be very fast so that the image is not over exposed, but why is the lense called fast I thought the shutter was inside the camera or is the shutter actually inside the lens? And if I want to shoot a shallow depth of field shot with something like F .95 or F1 or whatever, does that mean I have to adjust my shutter speed to something extremely fast? But wouldn't shutter speed adjust my frame rate and thus deviate from the 24fps that I'm trying to shoot? Can someone enumerate these things for me so I understand them, thanks a lot!

 

[Exact]

It's a good job I'm waiting for a long render right now !!!

thanks again for the responses guys they have been very helpful.
I'd like to ask you all something not directly related to the GH1 but just cameras in general, information that will help me perhaps choose a lens for the GH1 and such.

Hmmm.... are you ready for this ?

Through my research recently I have learned most of the terminology for example ISO is for light conditions, you use higher ISO for low light conditions, low ISO like 50-100 for normal or bright light conditions.

See the bit about exposure below.

MM I understand as the distance between the end of the lens and the aperture or the chip (can't remember which) but basically means that the higher the MM the more zoom or close angle the shot is whereas the lower the mm the wider angle the shot.

Reasonable assumptions.

The F1.8 stuff as I understand is the f-stop and refers to the size of the aperture opening. F22 is a tiny aperture hole meant for huge depth of field and F1.8 or something like that is a huge opened aperture meant for super shallow depth of field where only the subject is in focus.

Within reason - yes. Be aware that many people assume that 'stopping down' (increased the F number / reducing the aperture opening) will increase depth of field and thus proportionally more of the shot will be in-focus - or - 'sharp'. However all lenses suffer from 'diffraction' at some point which will actually reduce how sharp the picture will be. Some lenses can have diffraction as early as F4 and others it doesn't creep in until F11-F16. So be warned!

The thing I DON'T understand though is shutter speed and in what situations should that be adjusted?

In still photography you use shutter speed in combination with aperture (and to a lesser extent ISO) to make the correct exposure.

'Exposure' is made of three different things :
a) Aperture (the 'f' number)
b) Shutter Speed (how much time the sensor is exposed to the light)
c) ISO (or Gain on a video camera) - how sensitive the sensor (film) was to the light

Assume for a moment that you have the camera shutter speed set to 1/250 and the Aperture set to f5.6. If you wanted to increase the exposure (make the picture lighter) you could either change the aperture to f4 OR reduce the shutter speed to 1/125, and in terms of exposure each of these changes would be identical. The difference between them would be the depth of field (f4 will be more shallow than f5.6). Likewise, if you wanted a lower exposure level you could have changed the shutter speed to 1/500 OR changed the aperture to f8. Each of these would halve the amount of light reaching the sensor, but again f5.6 to f8 would increase depth of field. Changing the Aperture effects DOF, changing shutter speed does not.

To put it another way, every time you double the shutter speed you halve the amount of light. Every time you halve the shutter speed you double the amount of light reaching the sensor.

The aperture of a lens is based on how much light is being STOPPED from reaching the film/sensor. This is why it's called stopping down. As a simple guide, increasing the aperture number by a multiple of 1.4 will halve the amount of light, so in the following sequence, 1.0, 1.4, 2.0, 2.8, 4.0, 5.6, 8.0, 11, 16, 22 etc, each step will HALVE the amount of light reaching the sensor, but will also increase the depth of field. By deciding on how much depth of field you want (and so the aperture you chose) you may need to adjust the shutter speed (e.g. 1/25, 1/50, 1/125, 1/250, 1/500 etc) to get the required exposure. Choosing your aperture first, then selecting an appropriate shutter speed to match is called 'Aperture Priority' mode ('A' or 'Av' depending on the brand).

So, why else would you change the shutter speed? In still photography, you may want to freeze the action, so you would use a fast shutter speed (e.g. 1/500 or 1/1000) and select an aperture to match. This would be caller 'Shutter Priority' mode ('S' or 'Tv' depending on the brand).

Remember, this is STILL photos we are talking about. Video has other rules based on shutter speed and frame rates which do not apply to still photos. The general rule of thumb with video is to have your shutter speed be twice your frame rate (approx). So shooting at 24fps would require a shutter speed of 1/48 (1/50 on some cameras is close enough). Shooting at 60fps would require 1/120 (1/125 is close enough). There is lots of info about this on the web.

And secondly, how does that relate to the f-stops and why are low f-stop lenses called "fast lenses"? I would assume it's perhaps because when an aperture is opened all the way that means it's letting in a ton of light and so the shutter speed has to be very fast so that the image is not over exposed, but why is the lense called fast I thought the shutter was inside the camera or is the shutter actually inside the lens? And if I want to shoot a shallow depth of field shot with something like F .95 or F1 or whatever, does that mean I have to adjust my shutter speed to something extremely fast? But wouldn't shutter speed adjust my frame rate and thus deviate from the 24fps that I'm trying to shoot? Can someone enumerate these things for me so I understand them, thanks a lot!

The lower the f-stop, the less light is being 'stopped' from entering the sensor. Because more light means a faster shutter speed is required to maintain the same exposure, a 'fast' lens is one that allows for a faster shutter speed in the same light because you can open the aperture further (let more light in). Remember, if the shutter speed was 1/60 at f4.0 and this lens can open to (say) f1.4, a shutter speed of 1/500 would be needed @ f1.4 to get the same exposure as 1/60 @ f4. That's a LOT faster than 1/60. Hence it's a fast lens.

In video, it's usually not desirable to have high shutter speeds because things can start to look animated rather than nice motion. So, what do you do if you want to shoot at (say) f2.0 at a shutter speed of (say) 1/125, but that would be *really* over exposed? On a still camera you would like increase your shutter speed to compensate, but on video you would add Neutral Density filters to reduce the light reaching the lens. Video Cameras (as opposed to still cameras that also shoot video) have Nd filters built in that you can turn on/off as required. Some are electronic and some are mechanical and require you to manually switch them in.

What we didn't talk about here was ISO and/or Gain. ISO sensitivity is not 'real' in most cameras, but is in fact achieved by boosting / amplifying the base signal from the sensor to emulate more light. However, this has the problem that in addition to boosting the signal (light), it also boosts the noise, which is usually very undesirable. In most cases you will want to shoot with as low an ISO setting as you can get away with while still achieving the right exposure.

Stick with ISO 100 until you can't get the shot any other way, and only then increase the ISO as required. It is usually better to increase the light (e.g. using lighting!) than increase the ISO, but of course that is not always possible.

 

[Exact]

Oh, there is more ..... (sorry)

On still cameras the shutter speed also needs to be set with focal length in mind too. The general rule of thumb is the minimum shutter speed should be 1/focal length. So, if you are shooting at 125mm then your shutter speed should be at least 1/125 to avoid motion blur.

While new optical image stabilization technologies can help (MegaOIS on Panasonic, IS on Canon, VR on Nikon etc) trying to go much slower than 1/focal length really needs a tripod. Shooting with a 400mm lens would need the shutter speed to be 1/400 or higher. Shooting a 35mm lens can be achieved at 1/30 if you are really steady - but not every one can do this!

Shooting video with a 400mm lens needs to be on a tripod - end of story.

As you can see from this, sometimes you will need to open up the aperture in order to allow the faster shutter speeds (due to focal length), and 'slow' lenses may not be able to open up far enough (e.g. f5.6 vs f2.8). In this case you may have no alternative but to increase the ISO to allow the faster shutter speed.

As a general guide, if you need more light then you have three choices (other than adding light artificially)

1) Open the aperture (e.g. f8 to f5.6) - the side effect will be reduced DOF
2) Reduce the shutter speed (e.g. 1/500 to 1/125) - the side effect is how steady you can hold the camera or freeze the action
3) Increase ISO (or Gain on a video camera) - the side effect is extra noise

If you want to reduce the light then you have a choice of :

1) Close the Aperture (e.g. f8 to f11) - the side effect is more DOF or diffraction at higher f stops
2) double the shutter speed - (usually still photos only)
3) reduce the ISO (100 is the usual minimum)

On a video camera, reducing the light would mean adding ND filters.

 

[Undisputed Truth]

I dont take photos professionally but I do carry the gh1 everywhere I go just taking pictures of my life, with that it mind I really enjoy the color rendition of the gh1 in stills (and video) also the photos are fairly crisp so it is perfectly fine for me.

 

[Kholi]

Woot. Homunculus.

 

[Phil Seastrand]

In video, it's usually not desirable to have high shutter speeds because things can start to look animated rather than nice motion.

To expand on this, with video, you generally want to have what's called motion blur -- that is, things in motion should be blurred slightly. Our own eyes do this to a certain extent and any movie shot properly will do this. High shutter speed on video is often called "animated" because in the early days of animation, each frame was essentially a still frame either painted by hand or by a computer. Therefore there was no motion blur. Today, animation software automatically inserts motion blur when it renders each frame. This is one of the biggest reasons animation started to look so much more real.

 

[rob00]

How do i enable iso 320?

 

[Exact]

How do i enable iso 320?

You need to enable ISO increments of 1/3 instead of whole stops. With one of the CAMERA functions selected on the dial (e.g. 'A') go to the menu, then in the camera settings menu (the icon with the camera at the top) go to ISO Increments and change to 1/3. Now you will have many more ISO options, including 320.

However, before you rush off and use it - do some tests to satisfy yourself that 320 is not noisier than 400. Often the whole stop increments are real values and the steps in between are boosted artificially in software - which can increase the noise present. Sometimes it's better to take whole stop steps instead. Whole stops would be 100,200,400,800 etc. So 320 'may' be noisier than '400'.

I have not done exhaustive testing on the GH1 for this, but it's certainly been true on many other cameras I've used.

 

[Homunculus]

Guys thanks for all the responses...it took a while for me to digest some of the more technical stuff because I finally got the cam and have been learning and reading the manual and researching etc etc....

anyway now I have a few more questions if you all don't mind.


I am looking to get my first prime and fast lens now that I have been nonstop mucking around with the kit lens. It's a great lens with awesome quality but I can now see that in low light it's just not good enough. I really need something in the f.1x range...

the contenders so far are:

1. Lumix 20mm 1.7. $399 new

2. Canon 50mm 1.8. About 100$ new

3. Canon 50mm 1.4. About 350$ new

4. Nikon 50mm 1.8. About 130$ new


Now my initial noob impressions are the following and can you guys please correct them or give your feedback and what you feel is the best and what I should go for

Lumix lens quality is great and doesn't require an adapter ...this is the front runner but it's also the most expensive

The canon 50mm 1.8 and 1.4 don't know much about but they require an adapter so despite being cheaper the 1.4 with adapter will be almost same price as the Lumix ...so the biggest question and battle is what's better the canon 50mm 1.4 or Lumix 20mm 1.7.

Nikon 50mm 1.8. This one seemed really crappy to me...consumer/hobbyist lens. The bokeh from what I've seen is terrible and the image is very blurry and "soft" at highest apertures of 1.8, however what it has going for it is I can get it as cheap as 80$ used on craigslist/ebay/amazon etc....

Please weigh in with your opinions ...will it be the canon 1.4 or the pancake lumix 1.7??

 

[Exact]

You need to consider how you are going to control the aperture of the prime lenses you buy. There are adapters for Nikon (even new lenses) and older Canon 'FD' lenses that allow you to manually control the aperture. Check how you are going to control the Aperture on the newer Canon 'EF' lenses. This is important!

I've had both Canon & Nikon 50 f1.8 and they are both about the same in terms of image quality. Others may have different opinions. I've also had the f1.4 versions of both and both were soft at f1.4, but both were useable 'with care'.

You may be able to pick up older Canon FD (with full manual aperture control) as well as Nikon lenses on e-bay very cheaply, so it's very much worth while looking at that before spending lots of cash on new stuff.

The Lumix 20/1.7 is on my wish list too.

As for whether it should be the Lumix or the 50/1.4, they have different field of view, so which one you use so which one is 'right' depends on what you plan to shoot!

 

[Homunculus]

Hi Exact thanks for your very informative responses especially the big one from page 1, I learned a lot from it though like I said it took a while for it to all digest...lol.

Here's sort of what I *think* I want. Seeing as how the GH1 low light capabilities are reportedly slightly on the weak side, and seeing how a lot if not most of my ideas for short films have to do in low light, night time city settings, I want something with the best possible quality, clarity, sharpness at the best light gathering capabilities. So, I want something basically that will give me the best usable image quality with best light gathering abilities. What do you think wins with those conditions, is it the lumix 20mm 1.7 or canon 50mm 1.4 or is there anything else? I would consider at this time something 300-400$ range at the very most.

Now to my knowledge I wouldn't mind a manual aperture control, any CONS to using manual aperture control? I can't think of any...

as for Canon FD, what is that? I mean as compared to the 'newer lenses' you mention. Is the "FD" line from SLR's as opposed to DSLR and if so, is there any difference or quality lost? I see a canon FD 50mm 1.8 for only 30-40$ on ebay. How is that possible...must be crappy, no? Why are they all so cheap....30-50$ max it seems lol.


Oh and another question...canon 50mm lens, does that mean it is equivalent to 25mm field of view due to the cropping factor I read about due to the fact that micro 4/3rds like GH1 has much shorter focal distance from end of lens to sensor due to not having a mirror?

Thanks!

 

[Exact]

Now to my knowledge I wouldn't mind a manual aperture control, any CONS to using manual aperture control? I can't think of any...

None. I prefer it. Unless you are shooting in an automatic mode (which I never do) you will want to have full manual control anyway. This is one of the great advantages of the GH1.

as for Canon FD, what is that? I mean as compared to the 'newer lenses' you mention. Is the "FD" line from SLR's as opposed to DSLR and if so, is there any difference or quality lost? I see a canon FD 50mm 1.8 for only 30-40$ on ebay. How is that possible...must be crappy, no? Why are they all so cheap....30-50$ max it seems lol.

Canon replaced the FD line of lenses with the EF line in the 80s. This is the point where Canon went to autofocus systems. The FD line does not fit the current EF mount without an adapter, and even then it's not a good match. Because of this, not many people with DSLRs want to buy the older FD lenses (no auto focus and does not fit their cameras), so demand is low, and so are prices.

If you mount a new EF lens to the GH1 you will need an adapter, and the lens will always be wide open, i.e. a 1.4 lens will always be at 1.4 and a 2.8 will always be at 2.8. I am not aware of an adapter that controls the aperture (but there may be one - I haven't looked that hard). The big difference here is that while the FD lenses also require an adapter, the lens itself also comes with an aperture ring, so you can set the aperture directly on the lens. Combine that with cheaper s/h prices and GH1 owners have a lot to be happy about.

OTOH, there are adapters for Nikon lenses (and others) that allow you to control the aperture of the lens via the adapter in cases where the lens itself does not have an aperture ring.

Oh and another question...canon 50mm lens, does that mean it is equivalent to 25mm field of view due to the cropping factor I read about due to the fact that micro 4/3rds like GH1 has much shorter focal distance from end of lens to sensor due to not having a mirror?

No, it's the opposite. You need to multiply rather than divide by 2. For still photography at least, the 20mm will have a FOV of 40mm and a 50mm will have a FOV of 100mm.

Use your kit lens to check out which FOV you like the most. While the kit lens says 14-140, it's FOV is actually 28-280.

 

[chrisso]

Exact, you deserve a medal.
Great stuff. I'm getting a lot from this thread too.
I admit I'm confused by the video side of things. I've used still cameras for years, but never made video.
I recently bought Final Cut Express 4.
Am I right in thinking if I employ the GH13 hack I can log and transfer into FC, then start editing right away?
I'm in PAL land and have a PAL GH-1. Is there anything I should set up in FC, session set up or FC preference,s to work with the best quality files, and what would my best quality final output format be, something I can view personally and upload to Vimeo?
Most of the forum advice and tutorial stuff on the web is based around NTSC.