GH2 Downsides compared to a GH13?

[Matthew P]

Just wondering about the GH2 vs GH13. The major downside to the GH2 for me is lack of 25p. However, everything else looks good at first glance.

I have a couple of questions for GH2 owners though...

How much better is the codec in 24p mode? Is it significantly better than the GH13 in native 24p/25p? What about 720p, does it hold up well?

Is there any trace of FPN on the GH2, even in high ISO shots? This for me was a huge problem with my GH13, so I returned it and haven't bought another one because they all seem to have it pretty badly. This is the major reason for me considering a GH2.

What about banding? Is there any trace of that too? I've noticed some weird and quite severe anomalies in a couple of videos: http://vimeo.com/18214590 (very bad! :undecided) http://vimeo.com/18090234 are these typical results, or are the cameras faulty or something?

Some users are noting that the camera seems to suffer from an abnormal amount of strobing (as if the camera is setting the shutter speed higher than it says it is). Is this a genuine problem, or are these users doing something wrong?


How's performance in low light? Is it much better than a GH1 in terms of usability?

Overall, are you substantially more pleased with a GH2 rather than a GH13? Worth an extra £350?

Thanks!

 

[roei z]

.... that's gonna be a long thread..

about 24p 24Mbps - the codec is VBR, so it will not stick to the max, so you won't get it's full benefits unless hacked..
banding is not a big problem at least for me. stick up to 800 iso, and when going above that, learn how to avoid the banding.
and now for the f##$%g extra strobe - i PM'ed you about my current thoughts. someone needs to step up and make final conclusions once and for all (and comparisons of pan shots between canon, gh13, gh2)
for me the strobe is my main concern and i really hate it.
apart from that, never used GH13 so no idea...

 

[sasi_yaad]

How much better is the codec in 24p mode? Is it significantly better than the GH13 in native 24p/25p? What about 720p, does it hold up well?

720p on GH2 is the same as 720p on GH1, no mach for GH13 720p (same applies to MJPEG ) . If I need to track birds in flight over complex bacgrond I use GH13.
GH2 24Mbps is much better, but then again last week I had some 'not so good' results (codec wise) while shooting gulls standing on rocks over moving sea waves, so GH13 25p average 45Mbps can look better on some occasions. Just keep in mind that you can not get complex wide shots with 14-140 lens and those GH13 data rates, and that I am talking only about the codec.

 

[Matthew P]

banding is not a big problem at least for me. stick up to 800 iso, and when going above that, learn how to avoid the banding.

Is the banding you're referring to the little horizontal line in low light? Take a look at the videos I linked they're pretty severe. They must be exceptions though... no one's complained much about it so it can't be with many GH2s.

and now for the f##$%g extra strobe - i PM'ed you about my current thoughts. someone needs to step up and make final conclusions once and for all (and comparisons of pan shots between canon, gh13, gh2)
for me the strobe is my main concern and i really hate it.

From what I've gathered it might be a bug with the shutter speed (it can't be anything else; motion is even in the recorded files) on a couple of GH2s. Can't you get a replacement?

720p on GH2 is the same as 720p on GH1, no mach for GH13 720p (same applies to MJPEG ) . If I need to track birds in flight over complex bacgrond I use GH13.
GH2 24Mbps is much better, but then again last week I had some 'not so good' results (codec wise) while shooting gulls standing on rocks over moving sea waves, so GH13 25p average 45Mbps can look better on some occasions. Just keep in mind that you can not get complex wide shots with 14-140 lens and those GH13 data rates, and that I am talking only about the codec.

From what I've seen, although the codec is reported to be the same for 720p, the GH2's 720p looks far sharper. The GH1 looks standard def in comparison... but then, the GH2 does seem to suffer from aliasing in the said mode, which is a shame. Anyway, I guess the GH1 beats the GH2 for codec quality?

 

[roei z]

From what I've gathered it might be a bug with the shutter speed (it can't be anything else; motion is even in the recorded files) on a couple of GH2s. Can't you get a replacement?

Absolutely not. It's from Japan. Don't be so pessimistic please.
Might be some firmware or other issue

 

[flinty]

720p on GH2 is the same as 720p on GH1, no mach for GH13 720p (same applies to MJPEG ) . If I need to track birds in flight over complex bacgrond I use GH13.
GH2 24Mbps is much better, but then again last week I had some 'not so good' results (codec wise) while shooting gulls standing on rocks over moving sea waves, so GH13 25p average 45Mbps can look better on some occasions. Just keep in mind that you can not get complex wide shots with 14-140 lens and those GH13 data rates, and that I am talking only about the codec.

Different to my findings and what i have been shown http://vimeo.com/17980452 that GH2 720P 1080i are similar,24P is sharpest but the strobing look on pal puts me off.Perhaps you are refering to movement though.

 

[sasi_yaad]

Yes flinty,
I am talking about codec breakup or mud while panning over complex background.
GH13 720p 35-45Mbps average holds good, GH2 720p 16Mbps shows mud (or worse ).
I am not talking about resolution.

 

[nathankw]

Other advantages of the GH13:
- High bitrate Mjpeg mode including 422 colour
- Switchable between PAL/NTSC models
- Removal of 30 min limit on pal models
- Use of 3rd party batteries

 

[Blackout]

Oh no. This question again.

I have several LONG posts on this topic. If you search my user name you will find them.

I apparently have a 'magic' gh13 that does not exhibit as many of the low light problems and streaking in high isos as I have seen with other GH13s, but then again, it depends highly on what your HACK codec settings are. All GH13s are NOT equal - where as all GH2s should in theory be. My settings are for 21 mbit low, 52 mbit high, 42 mbit avg, 24pn CHECKED. I achieve AMAZING STUNNING INCREDIBLE DETAILED wide shots with little to no aliasing. To me, the GH2 looks far to edge enhanced and has more aliasing. Some think that looks sharper and more detailed. I personally do not like it and would dial that son o ***** way down in sharpness. A wide shot of trees in winter with no leaves looked pretty bad on the GH2 (aliasing) and looked very very good on my GH13.

I toyed with one for a bit before they were actually available and I have played with one since, and to me it would make no sense and really have no advantage to get a GH2. To my eyes, there are several problems, including the above mentioned aliasing, the still what I consider to be a very low bit rate that definitely exhibits weird problems in certain areas of the frame - especially shadow areas in very detailed or high motion scenes. No.. not just a whip pan on trees or bushes - but real world shooting situations.

Let me not sound like I am bashing the GH2. I am not, but it really needs the hack to be able to compete or replace a properly hacked GH13, and I have noticed that strobe issue as well but just attributed it to user error on the settings, yet now it seems there actually IS some sort of a problem in some cameras.

The GH2 has better low light to some degree but I don't think it's THAT much better. If you see some of my low light footage that I have posted publicly (Prince concert, and some club scenes for a music vid artist that were shot in almost total darkness) I achieved amazing noise and streak free results with my hacked GH13. Whereas others say it's a noisy streaky mess. Is this user or camera or hack setting variance? Probably a bit of all three.

If you are buying new... it's a tough choice, the GH2 also has hdmi out for monitoring (which I have gotten so used to NOT having) but if you already have the GH13 I really think it's a better camera when SET UP PROPERLY.

If you need more pro support and the best of all worlds (barring the ultra secret portability factor), you would go for the AF-100, but you are not necessarily getting THAT much better of an image for your extra five or six thousand dollars - you are getting pro features that help on a pro set and better controls that are easier to access - and you are getting hd-sdi out so IF you use that rather than the still limited codec to SD cards - you can do some amazing stuff which in essence makes the AF-100 a super hacked GH13&2 combo with pro ins and outs and controls.

Hope this helped.

- Blackout

 

[rigs]

Oh no. This question again.

I have several LONG posts on this topic. If you search my user name you will find them.

I apparently have a 'magic' gh13 that does not exhibit as many of the low light problems and streaking in high isos as I have seen with other GH13s, but then again, it depends highly on what your HACK codec settings are. All GH13s are NOT equal - where as all GH2s should in theory be. My settings are for 21 mbit low, 52 mbit high, 42 mbit avg, 24pn CHECKED. I achieve AMAZING STUNNING INCREDIBLE DETAILED wide shots with little to no aliasing. To me, the GH2 looks far to edge enhanced and has more aliasing. Some think that looks sharper and more detailed. I personally do not like it and would dial that son o ***** way down in sharpness. A wide shot of trees in winter with no leaves looked pretty bad on the GH2 (aliasing) and looked very very good on my GH13.

I toyed with one for a bit before they were actually available and I have played with one since, and to me it would make no sense and really have no advantage to get a GH2. To my eyes, there are several problems, including the above mentioned aliasing, the still what I consider to be a very low bit rate that definitely exhibits weird problems in certain areas of the frame - especially shadow areas in very detailed or high motion scenes. No.. not just a whip pan on trees or bushes - but real world shooting situations.

Let me not sound like I am bashing the GH2. I am not, but it really needs the hack to be able to compete or replace a properly hacked GH13, and I have noticed that strobe issue as well but just attributed it to user error on the settings, yet now it seems there actually IS some sort of a problem in some cameras.

The GH2 has better low light to some degree but I don't think it's THAT much better. If you see some of my low light footage that I have posted publicly (Prince concert, and some club scenes for a music vid artist that were shot in almost total darkness) I achieved amazing noise and streak free results with my hacked GH13. Whereas others say it's a noisy streaky mess. Is this user or camera or hack setting variance? Probably a bit of all three.

If you are buying new... it's a tough choice, the GH2 also has hdmi out for monitoring (which I have gotten so used to NOT having) but if you already have the GH13 I really think it's a better camera when SET UP PROPERLY.

If you need more pro support and the best of all worlds (barring the ultra secret portability factor), you would go for the AF-100, but you are not necessarily getting THAT much better of an image for your extra five or six thousand dollars - you are getting pro features that help on a pro set and better controls that are easier to access - and you are getting hd-sdi out so IF you use that rather than the still limited codec to SD cards - you can do some amazing stuff which in essence makes the AF-100 a super hacked GH13&2 combo with pro ins and outs and controls.

Hope this helped.

- Blackout

The vertical streaks and banding have nothing to do with codec bitrates or magic its the sensor litmitation. Exposer is the key. Suck up enough light and the senor will perform properlly and pretty good at most iso values. Underexpose and your asking it to outperform itself.

 

[roei z]

The vertical streaks and banding have nothing to do with codec bitrates or magic its the sensor litmitation. Exposer is the key. Suck up enough light and the senor will perform properlly and pretty good at most iso values. Underexpose and your asking it to outperform itself.

now THAT's more like it

 

[Blackout]

The vertical streaks and banding have nothing to do with codec bitrates or magic its the sensor litmitation. Exposer is the key. Suck up enough light and the senor will perform properlly and pretty good at most iso values. Underexpose and your asking it to outperform itself.

You forgot NOISE in addition to streaks...

Then you explain to me this shot:

Specifically from :30 to :40 seconds. There was literally almost NO light.. I could barely even see.. I had iso pumped out to its max and the image is as clean and streak and noise free as can be. On many other cameras this would be a noisy mess. Why? What is the x factor?

 

[Matthew P]

Oh no. This question again.

I have several LONG posts on this topic. If you search my user name you will find them.

I apparently have a 'magic' gh13 that does not exhibit as many of the low light problems and streaking in high isos as I have seen with other GH13s, but then again, it depends highly on what your HACK codec settings are. All GH13s are NOT equal - where as all GH2s should in theory be. My settings are for 21 mbit low, 52 mbit high, 42 mbit avg, 24pn CHECKED. I achieve AMAZING STUNNING INCREDIBLE DETAILED wide shots with little to no aliasing. To me, the GH2 looks far to edge enhanced and has more aliasing. Some think that looks sharper and more detailed. I personally do not like it and would dial that son o ***** way down in sharpness. A wide shot of trees in winter with no leaves looked pretty bad on the GH2 (aliasing) and looked very very good on my GH13.

I toyed with one for a bit before they were actually available and I have played with one since, and to me it would make no sense and really have no advantage to get a GH2. To my eyes, there are several problems, including the above mentioned aliasing, the still what I consider to be a very low bit rate that definitely exhibits weird problems in certain areas of the frame - especially shadow areas in very detailed or high motion scenes. No.. not just a whip pan on trees or bushes - but real world shooting situations.

Let me not sound like I am bashing the GH2. I am not, but it really needs the hack to be able to compete or replace a properly hacked GH13, and I have noticed that strobe issue as well but just attributed it to user error on the settings, yet now it seems there actually IS some sort of a problem in some cameras.

The GH2 has better low light to some degree but I don't think it's THAT much better. If you see some of my low light footage that I have posted publicly (Prince concert, and some club scenes for a music vid artist that were shot in almost total darkness) I achieved amazing noise and streak free results with my hacked GH13. Whereas others say it's a noisy streaky mess. Is this user or camera or hack setting variance? Probably a bit of all three.

If you are buying new... it's a tough choice, the GH2 also has hdmi out for monitoring (which I have gotten so used to NOT having) but if you already have the GH13 I really think it's a better camera when SET UP PROPERLY.

If you need more pro support and the best of all worlds (barring the ultra secret portability factor), you would go for the AF-100, but you are not necessarily getting THAT much better of an image for your extra five or six thousand dollars - you are getting pro features that help on a pro set and better controls that are easier to access - and you are getting hd-sdi out so IF you use that rather than the still limited codec to SD cards - you can do some amazing stuff which in essence makes the AF-100 a super hacked GH13&2 combo with pro ins and outs and controls.

Hope this helped.

- Blackout

Appreciating the input Blackout. I agree that the GH13 with native 24/25p is absolutely stunning, and has a far more solid look than the GH2. The thing is though, it's very hit and miss to get a 'magical' GH1, as they're probably rather rare. Does yours not exhibit any solid vertical lines (fpn) on any kind of shots whatsoever? I love that the GH13 isn't locked to a region, but it's just the awful FPN on some that's preventing me from getting one again!

 

[Blackout]

Appreciating the input Blackout. I agree that the GH13 with native 24/25p is absolutely stunning, and has a far more solid look than the GH2. The thing is though, it's very hit and miss to get a 'magical' GH1, as they're probably rather rare. Does yours not exhibit any solid vertical lines (fpn) on any kind of shots whatsoever? I love that the GH13 isn't locked to a region, but it's just the awful FPN on some that's preventing me from getting one again!

Yeah there is weird sensor variance. I know because I have shot in the same environment where my B and C cams had streaks or more noise, and my A cam did not. One camera DEFINITELY has a better sensor than the others as all of them have exactly the same ptools hack file and were set the same. Look at the clip I posted above from 00:30 to 00:40 seconds. That was only that clear and streak and noise free on my A cam, on another camera it looked bad.

 

[rigs]

You forgot NOISE in addition to streaks...

Then you explain to me this shot:

Specifically from :30 to :40 seconds. There was literally almost NO light.. I could barely even see.. I had iso pumped out to its max and the image is as clean and streak and noise free as can be. On many other cameras this would be a noisy mess. Why? What is the x factor?

There will always be noise as you up the iso, every camera will give you that, gain=noise. First off if your happy with the results you are getting, then it doesn't matter what I or any technical proof would expsose. However I still see small amounts of vertical banding in some of your clips in your posted piece. There is allot more to it then your magic here. As with any camera and very much these or any DSLR. Propper EXPOSURE at higher ISO values is the X factor and it reveals allot of limitations, some are just more acceptable to others.

 

[Ian-T]

Plus there is plenty of residual light filling the sensor in that glass scene. Most cameras should perform ok in a shot like that. I bet if you backed off on that shot then you will start to see the uglies appear....more.

 

[Blackout]

Rigs I don't doubt you for a second but what I am talking about is not the glass scene.. that has plenty of light as I am flooding the icecubes with a little led flashlight I got for two bucks at home depot. The scene I am talking about is from :30 to :40 seconds where they are smoking. There really was no light there and I was isod to the max and while not PERFECT.. the image is amazingly clear and visable.. those light bars were NOT that bright and they were behind them, and I am dangling two little pen lights... I could barely see them.. I was amazed that the clip was even usable when I was at such a high iso. So what I am saying is that my A camera must have a better sensor because the same scenes with that low light have a lot more noise and streaks on my other two cameras - with the exact same settings. I don't even bother trying to do low light with either of them.

 

[Lucas Adamson]

I also have a magical GH1 it seems, if that's what we're calling them now. I can't produce streaks in any lighting conditions. Lucky I guess. I still think that the GH2 outperforms this bad boy in very low light though, and would upgrade if I were rich, but I probably won't until the AF100 is second hand-able.

 

[Blackout]

I'm about to make my pounce on my AF-100. Lining up a few projects to pay for it. Hop, skip, and jumping right over the GH2. I landed on COMMUNITY CHEST and it sent me straight to AF-100.

 

[averan]

Blackout:
what lenses did you use on that shoot?
and please stop telling us about your magic cam! =) it just makes the rest of us feel like our cameras are crap.