DSLR or Hybrid ?

[Rabot]

GH2 would be amazing if it wasn't for the outrageously bad jello & mediocre DR (range could be considered the final frontier of what's making video look like video, or digital film). Another issue i had with GH2 was the fixed line appearing on the sensor in ISO above 400, clearly visible in anyting above 800. Big shame, cus low-light is otherwise a strongpoint for GH2.

...then again, everyone doesn't need or want a cinematic look -- GH13/2/AF100 are all superb video cameras providing a look few others do.

IMO the moire problems are exaggerated with Canon, but x2 worse with Nikon (D7000, to me more precise). If i lived in a brick city like Amsterdam or something i would probably always keep a GH2 in the bag however, but for everything else, the false resolution is _what makes it look organic_, remember that... embrace the softness.

I don't see any line thing above 400 iso. Neither a jello higher than the GH1.
People complain about the bad noise in ETC mode, I don't even see it.

 

[TheDingo]

I've seen other posts where people mention the "line thing" with high ISO settings, but they are usually shooting in the 1600 - 3200 range. ( I try to keep things at 800 ISO or lower simply because I want a detailed low noise image )

GH-2 camera Jello seems to be about the same as my Canon 60D was, so I don't see any real disadvantage here.

ETC mode does lose detail compared to 1080 24P, so I use it only when I have to.

 

[Ian-T]

GH2 would be amazing if it wasn't for the outrageously bad jello & mediocre DR (range could be considered the final frontier of what's making video look like video, or digital film).

DR is not bad at all. There are some "film" cameras that are not far off. I think we are just too spoiled with comparing it to other cameras. If you take good care in your shooting (whether you have an Alexa or a pocket cam) then in post production all that goes out the window. I've seen 35mm productions that look like home movies (actually worse).

But as far as its so caled "outrageously bad jello" I have to totally disagree. It's no more worse than my old 7D. This point seems way over exaggerated.

Another issue i had with GH2 was the fixed line appearing on the sensor in ISO above 400, clearly visible in anyting above 800. Big shame, cus low-light is otherwise a strongpoint for GH2.

You know...I honestly can't recall the last time I read someone complain about this. We've seen all the posts when the GH-2 first came out...but I've had mine since March and if it wasn't for you mentioning here I wouldn't even be thinking about it. Oh well... glad I don't have that issue.

...then again, everyone doesn't need or want a cinematic look -- GH13/2/AF100 are all superb video cameras providing a look few others do.

Ha....I see what you're implying here. As far as I'm concerned a "cinematic" look has nothing to do with a "film" look. Any camera can be made to look cinematic based on how you shoot and what you're shooting. As far as looking like film...that's more an aesthetic thing. How I feel about that is... digital looks....digital....and only film looks like film. So the bottom line...a Canon 7D looks like..... a Canon 7D. A GH-1/2 looks like....a GH-1/2. We should be comparing apples to apples instead.

There is a reason though why many folks are able to intercut Red with Af100/GH-xs. Then again if you don't like red...then...this is a moot point.

IMO the moire problems are exaggerated with Canon, but x2 worse with Nikon (D7000, to me more precise).

Yes..the moire on the Nikon does stick out more than the Canon. But IMO it's because the Nikon has a much more detailed image than the Canons (maybe even richer colors). If one can avoid the moire on the Nikons...then I prefer the Nikon's image much more than the Canons.

If i lived in a brick city like Amsterdam or something i would probably always keep a GH2 in the bag however, but for everything else, the false resolution is _what makes it look organic_, remember that... embrace the softness.

Yup. The softness of the Canons do make it look more organic. I've always said the same thing about the HVX's. But what swayed me in the end was the fact that with a sharper image from the GH-Xs I could always soften (if I wanted to) in post. But with an already soft image image I could never add what was never there in the first place.

In the end though...all of these cameeras make beautiful images in the right hands. I just wish I was half as good as most of you.

 

[ICD Films]

"But as far as its so caled "outrageously bad jello" I have to totally disagree. It's no more worse than my old 7D. This point seems way over exaggerated. "

Whatever floats your boat dude. If you feel it's the same as 7D, fine. I'm posting personal experience for the sake of others - not ranting emotionally based "point of view" opinions on tech. It's a gain to no one but your ego.

Of course they're all great cameras -- but if that's the only way we're gonna end up discussions on these boards, to always come to the conclusion that there's no point comparing specs cus "hey it's about the content, apples to apples" yada, I guess nobody needs to ask or post anything at all; now do they Ian?

Now let's all make an effort on the informative aspect instead of always trying to be right.

 

[Ian-T]

Me? Nah...not emotional or feeding any ego. The only thing I've been emotional about is my upcoming third child this October. It's just when the OP asked "I'd be very grateful for sharing any experience/opinion/advice which could lead me to make best decision" I thought I'd offer my experience (with at least two out of the three mentioned). It just so happens that "some" of my experiences with the Canon and Panasonics were different from yours.

But...to the OP...there was a skew/jello test performed somewhere in this forum (video on Vimeo) showing the similarities between the Canons and the Panasonics. IMO they were not that far off from one another. Also, the one main edge I give the Canons over the Panas is the light falloff. It just looks very nice on the 7D (even better than the 5Dll).

EDIT:

Now let's all make an effort on the informative aspect instead of always trying to be right.

I don't follow. We are just giving him our opinions right? If I say "the cup is half empty" and you say "it's half full"....who is right?

 

[Barry_Green]

But as far as its so caled "outrageously bad jello" I have to totally disagree. It's no more worse than my old 7D. This point seems way over exaggerated.

Agreed here. I had a 7D, and the GH2, and the GH2 is no worse than the 7D. I would wager they're extremely close in terms of jello -- unless you put the GH2 in ETC mode, then it's much quicker.

I thought Rick Burnett did his jello-test on both the GH2 and the 7D and scientifically declared them the same or similar? Am I remembering that right? Rick?

In any case -- no, the GH2 doesn't have jello performance like an AF100 or FS100, it's certainly a lot more jello-ey than those, but so's a 7D or 5D. And IIRC, the GH2 is right there with the 7D.

 

[NickG]

2. Lenses: Some people says, that there's lack of M4/3 lenses with good aperture. I'd like to ask how big is this pine in the ass if you need lenses (preferably one basic ZOOM lens) up to 400$ from second hand.

Thanks

There are adapters for pretty much any brand of used lens for M43. I use Canon FD (because I already had them), but other people swear by Nikon, Zeiss etc. The only limitation is that, because the M43 sensor is smaller, the crop factor means that the effective focal length of the lenses is double. So a 25-50mm zoom gives you images like a 50-100mm zoom on M43.

 

[mmmmlyy]

Every DSLR does better in closeups than anything else. The detail in distant objects is where you will see problems, especially if you're in a forest. The GH1 with the hack is currently doing better than any of the others, but I find that the 7D is able to give me a lot more options for color correcting in post. I own both, and I have to decide if I'm more concerned about the high image quality of and Panasonic DMW-BCF10PP the GH1(3) or the ability to craft the look better with the 7D. Or if it's an event I just use the GH1 because it doesn't have a recording limit.


Having said all this, I think dslrs have their limitations as others have said- they are just tools to do a certain job- they are very good at getting shallow DOF close/medium close
shots, not good for wides with lots of detail- you'll need another tool for that- maybe a GH2. Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS5 Battery Charger