Canon T2I vs. Sony NEX 5N vs. Panasonic GH2

D

dtjohns1

Well-known member

Canon T2I (Magic Lantern), Canon 28mm 1.8 EF, 1/48, 2.0, ISO 100, Neutral Picture Profile (0,-4,-2,0)
Sony 5N, Canon 28mm 1.8 EF, 1/50, 2.0, ISO 100, Sunset Creative Style (-3, -3, -3)
Panasonic GH2, Canon 28mm 1.8 EF, 1/50, 2.0, ISO 160 (Dimmed the 300 watt light to the left to match the exposure of the T2I and GH2), Nostalgia Film Mode (-2,-2,-2,-2), Smooth Film Mode (-2,-2,-2,-2)

All cameras were set to whatever their tungsten or incandescent white balance settings were (I know they do not match up but this was a test more for image quality and color straight from the camera). Images are not graded. My favorite image comes from the GH2 in the Smooth Film mode followed by the T2I.
 
No hacks on the GH2. It's already the best out of the three to me. Scary to think that the hack would make it even better.
 
I grow tired of someone who always has something to say about videos but doesn't have a single one up here. It's a quality test. You look at the difference in quality between the three cameras. How hard is that? My honest critique of you vision is you should really try and get off these boards for a day and shoot something yourself and put it up here. It's cool that you like to give criticism but how can anyone value your opinion if you have nothing to show for your own talent? Especially with this being a film related board.
 
Last edited:
dtjohns1 said:
I grow tired of someone who always has something to say about videos but doesn't have a single one up here. It's a quality test. You look at the difference in quality between the three cameras. How hard is that? My honest critique of you vision is you should really try and get off these boards for a day and shoot something yourself and put it up here. It's cool that you like to give criticism but how can anyone value your opinion if you have nothing to show for your own talent? Especially with this being a film related board.
Click to expand...


What I have as a "Vision" means nothing to this thread...... I guess Every single movie reviewer professional opinion does not count since they have never made a movie.... Or a fan of music cannot cannot form his opinion just because , they have never made an actual song.... See the truth is you need to learn how to take criticism. If something is good or bad I will post my opinion. More so what am I looking at here?

The fridge? Chair? Stove? Table? Microwave? Like I said poor framing and every shot should have a main focus where there audience should look at. Also all of your shots look crooked anyways + have poor flat lighting and you cannot properly tell anything...... I guess Zacuto will not be looking for your Director of Photography skills anytime soon when they have their next shootout.....

Peace
 
vision_filmz said:
What I have as a "Vision" means nothing to this thread...... I guess Every single movie reviewer professional opinion does not count since they have never made a movie.... Or a fan of music cannot cannot form his opinion just because , they have never made an actual song.... See the truth is you need to learn how to take criticism. If something is good or bad I will post my opinion. More so what am I looking at here?

The fridge? Chair? Stove? Table? Microwave? Like I said poor framing and every shot should have a main focus where there audience should look at. Also all of your shots look crooked anyways + have poor flat lighting and you cannot properly tell anything...... I guess Zacuto will not be looking for your Director of Photography skills anytime soon when they have their next shootout.....

Peace
Click to expand...

I really don't see how you can take criticism for a camera test for quality? If this was a short film or music video I could understand. So you're telling me no one can shoot a scene in a kitchen? You use things such as the rule of thirds and subject placement in the frame to direct a viewers eye to what you want them to look at but you probably wouldn't know because all you do is critique videos, complain about how frustrated you are with dslrs then turn around and defend them lol and ask for tips on lighting and techniques that you probably will never use because you never shoot anything. You can critique all you want but you have no merit behind them. You're basically like a dude with only $1,000 dollars in his bank account trying to coach someone on how to become a millionaire.
 
dtjohns1 said:
I really don't see how you can take criticism for a camera test for quality? If this was a short film or music video I could understand. So you're telling me no one can shoot a scene in a kitchen? You use things such as the rule of thirds and subject placement in the frame to direct a viewers eye to what you want them to look at but you probably wouldn't know because all you do is critique videos, complain about how frustrated you are with dslrs then turn around and defend them lol and ask for tips on lighting and techniques that you probably will never use because you never shoot anything. You can critique all you want but you have no merit behind them. You're basically like a dude with only $1,000 dollars in his bank account trying to coach someone on how to become a millionaire.
Click to expand...

You sure about that? I mean are you really sure about that?


A film maker on any level is always learning techniques, whether it be lighting, framing, lenses, etc. I may not know all of the technicals but I do know what looks good and doesn't. Further more whatever you think you know about me you don't. I have countless projects online and placed in many places with artists, but I'm not here to show my work as it would only cause problems with everyone asking me questions.

Finally lets forget about me for a second or who I am. I simply made an honest opinion here and it seemed to really bother you. In my opinion this is a poor test as you are not properly showing us as the audience what we should be looking at. Secondly the scene is poorly lit. A proper test should have proper framing and different focal lengths. With light and without light. Finally many people know that dslrs do not shine on wide shots, that's why I really pay them no mind.

I don't know you from a hole in the wall, but I do know about every director and mostly every project that is shot as I spend well over 10+ hours every day studying. If a project was good or bad then I will voice my opinion, no need to get personal.

A great film director said he will always be a student of the game....



ps. I have seen some of your work before and think you have a lot of good Music videos under your belt, nothing amazing but pretty good. My opinion was strictly on this project you presented which in my opinion is a poor test.
 
Last edited:
fruitypurple said:
Thanks for throwing this test up there.

Disregard criticism - there are a lot of armchair quarterbacks here.

What I see though is a big difference in white balance and picture profiles.

The white balance is tremendously different between cams. what happens if you use the portrait profile on the 5n, and set all the cameras at a manual 2900 white balance?

Cheers.
Click to expand...

Arm chair? Yeah maybe I'm just too real for a lot of people here.....

So I guess the next word anyone will say is a hater...... You people kill me on these forums. I guess where I'm from "Yes men" don't exist and where you people are from everything you do is the greatest..... No need to be here when it's filled with people who cannot understand what an opinion is. I guess every single person who ever had an opinion that didn't agree is an arm chair, hater or someone who knows nothing..... Keep surrounding yourself with people who praise your work and see how far you get.

No more time wasted here, I know what I stand for and believe in.

peace
 
Funny how you're (dtjohns1) taking criticism really badly yet the rules of this forum section state this 'HDSLR Screening Room' is "Brand names not spoken here... Artistic Discussion only" and I'll quote the rules of the forum:

Ok... So, this a place for folks to post their work, their films, etc.

BUT, there are a few guidelines:

This section is for artistic discussion only. Discuss framing, lighting, composition, etc.

You may NOT discuss resolution of the camera, technical aspects of x camera's performance, etc, etc, etc...

This is NOT a sub-forum for pixel peeping. This IS a sub-forum for folks to share and discuss their work on its artistic merits ONLY. Not to discuss the performance or shortcomings or limitations, etc of specific cameras.

You are welcome to NOT post the camera that you shot on.

Thanks. Little balance, and a little home for folks who want to focus on what they are doing with their cameras, rather than what their camera can or can't do.

later,
jason
Click to expand...

So vision_filmz was right to comment on the artistic side (whether you agree or not) and you got that because that's exactly what this section is for.

Poor attitude for someone wanting to be in the business.
 
@vision_filmz I will honestly say the only thing that bothers me is I come on here from time to time and I see you post something under almost EVERY video in this section and I'm like it's funny how the person giving all these critiques has nothing up for anyone to say "hmmm... I think I value his opinion he knows what he's tallking about" If a jambredz or rockmore, etc. said something I would be like ok I respect that because I've seen their work and quality and can say they know what they are talking about. Thank you for alluding to the very point I think will help you in the long run. You can "study" as many hours and as many directors as you want but it's 1000X better if you put in actual physical man-hours. You think Colin Tilley, TAJ, Matt Alonzo, Motion Family, Parris, etc. got where they are because they were sitting around critiquing other peoples vids and studying everyone else? Be a student of the game I get that but don't forget to be a player as well. I see you have a genuine love for the craft and I just want you to be as successful as you can be. And if you look at people that are on these boards and are really doing it out here for what you want to do (i.e. Matt Workman, Rich Lee) you will see that they are barely ever here because they are too busy doing their own projects.

@Symon I stand corrected as I will admit I have never looked at the rules of this board. I guess this was the wrong place to post this.
 
Last edited:
About the light? You say you dimmed the 300 watt light for the test...does that mean it clearly has the best light pick-up of all the cameras there? Also how much was the light dimmed (approximately)? Thanks so much for the video; I am contemplating a Canon DSLR (Magic Lantern-of course), a Pentax K-5, or a GH2. Thanks again.
 
@fruitypurple Yeah some profiles/cameras go warmer or cooler. I thought it was crazy that there were such drastic changes at the same default white balance setting. Good suggestion as far as manually setting each one tho. I'll have to try that. I haven't liked portrait creative style on the 5n since I started shooting with it. For some reason it has WAY too much artifacting going on in the image so I only use sunset which reduces this by a lot. Do you have a 5N? If so have you been experiencing problems with the portrait style or has it been o.k. for you?

@Joelius I dimmed the light because the GH2 has no 100 ISO option like the T2i and 5N. It starts at 160 ISO so I had to account for that by cutting back the light. I don't know exactly how much I dimmed the light tho. I basically went up two clicks on my shutter speed, took a picture, then dimmed the light to match what the picture looked like exposure-wise when I set it back to 1/50. As far as choosing a camera goes, if you can, I would wait and see what all these Canon announcements that are set to take place over the next couple of months are about before pulling the trigger. If you can't tho I would base my decision on what you need. 5N is good for the portability, 1080 60p, amazing in lowlight, cheap, and it has an aps-c sensor so the crop or dof isn't as bad as it would be on a gh2. GH2 has the best resolution, unlimited recording times, no overheating, little to no moire and aliasing. T2i has an image that a lot of people like despite some saying it's too soft and a lot of good lens support right off the bat plus magic lantern has a lot of great features.
 
Last edited:
Nice test, but its difficult to really compare the two when there is such a variance in exposure and white balance. I would try to match the two of these in camera as best as you can and then compare. Just my 2 cents. Nice test otherwise though. I actually like the lighting, it's soft but still high contrast on the subject. And yeah, a little dutch. lol
 
@PaPa Yeah I definitely see where you're coming from. lol at the dutch angle. Didn't really pay attention to framing as much as I should have. Really just wanted to see which camera looked the best after youtube compression. I was going to keep the vid to myself private but I thought wth might as well have it available for people on the fence about buying either one of these cams to look at the difference.
 
dtjohns1 said:
@PaPa Yeah I definitely see where you're coming from. lol at the dutch angle. Didn't really pay attention to framing as much as I should have. Really just wanted to see which camera looked the best after youtube compression. I was going to keep the vid to myself private but I thought wth might as well have it available for people on the fence about buying either one of these cams to look at the difference.
Click to expand...

When I do these sorts of tests I try to have at least a grey card in the shot. Then whatever the color of light, or the color of objects, I have that as a reference. I don't have the expensive Greytag/MacBeth
color chart, or the step charts, but for 'cheap' tests, a grey card (official Kodak 18% grey card...), is very beneficial. At least then you can see what the effect would be in 'color balancing' in post by using the grey card and adjusting the curves for a neutral grey on the card.

With several cards at various places in the shot, representing various light levels, one can also get an idea of the 'gamma' of the scene...

I was surprised at the 'blue cast' of the Sony...

In terms of 'forum' correctitude, probably the general DSLR section would have been better, as you have several brands, and posting to 3 sections would be tedious... Problem is I typically do not look at that section much... and probably others don't either, but usually spend time in their own camera section, unless they have several brands...
 
Last edited:
Good suggestion. I'll look into getting one of those. One thing that is tricky when it comes to the GH2 and the 5N especially is the liveview does a complete shift in color and gamma when you hit the record button so it makes it really hard to judge these things. I wish they were like the T2i where wysiwyg.
 
dtjohns1 said:
Good suggestion. I'll look into getting one of those. One thing that is tricky when it comes to the GH2 and the 5N especially is the liveview does a complete shift in color and gamma when you hit the record button so it makes it really hard to judge these things. I wish they were like the T2i where wysiwyg.
Click to expand...

I have the GH-1, and one of the maddening things is the lack of more accurate 'thru the lens' rendition. There are some mitigations on the GH-2, but still it seems this is sort of a major flaw of the electronic view finder implementations.

As it is I look at the basic composition, look at the histogram which is always enabled, meter the scene for contrast of 'important' features, etc. But it is a pain, and when I've used the camera under 'battle conditions' (took a few happy shots at a friend's wedding. Not quite battle, but that's the closest I want to get to wedding coverage these days...), the electronic view finder was often giving me the wrong impression... I should probably shoot more, and get use to it... but I don't really have the time these days for much of that.
 
Thanks for the quick reply, and the size really is not an issue to me. But the 5N's higher bit rate recording, 60p, and the light pick up (an impressive difference in your video) are making me consider it (I had discounted it earlier because it looked unprofessional and small), but I'm going to seriously consider it. I'm going to mount these on scorpion Steadicams and use 7" monitors with them so the size is not really an issue.
Also to me: I'm going to be filming movies, and I like to keep the camera moving, and this upcoming project is a horror, so there will be darkness and action. All together (plus my personal tastes) a "better depth of field" is a "deeper depth of field" for the same light conditions. I'm assuming you meant a "more shallow depth of field" which I see as a disadvantage (I do know many of the features that cause shallowness add light pick-up) so for the same light reception I would prefer the deepest depth of field I can buy. Thank you again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top