Finally saw GH2 footage first hand.. I am not upgrading. Staying with GH1.3

Status
Not open for further replies.
This sounds promising to me.

http://www.panasonic.net/avc/lumix/systemcamera/gms/gh2/high_speed.html

GH2 Movie mode
"The newly integrated motion detection circuit elevates the accuracy of motion detection to suppress the noise generated in moving parts more effectively."


Here are a couple of other things that have probably been confirmed before but I figured it couldn't hurt to post them. Notice that live view is not available for 5 FPS shooting and that if you use RAW images it is reduced to 4.5 FPS. Also the 40 FPS mode is limited to 40 images max.

shooting_image02.gif


*1 In the high speed burst shooting at 40 fps, the picture size is max. 4-megapixel (4:3), 3.8-megapixel (3:2), 2-megapixel (16:9) or 3-megapixel (1:1).
*2 When quality is set to RAW+Fine, RAW+Standard or RAW, burst speed is 4.5 fps.
*3 Images can be taken until the capacity of the card becomes full. However the burst speed will become slower halfway. The exact timing of this depends on the aspect ratio, the picture size, the setting for the quality and the type of card used.


This might be why we really have not seen any banding in high ISO movie modes. It won't help RAW shooting though.

Advanced Noise Reduction
By separating chromatic noise from luminance noise even more accurately by applying the optimal noise reduction to each, you can capture clear and beautiful images even when shooting at high ISO sensitivity levels. By preventing the color mixture which tends to occur around the edges, any chromatic noise, not only the in gradation part but also in the edge part, are described clearly. The engine also provides selective noise reduction to the outline part to let it have more naturally-balanced curve without deterioration of the resolution.
In addition, the spot-type noise which can be often seen in the dark area of the image taken in low light situation or color bleeding on high luminance area generated by the chromatic aberration.



From the examples I have seen this might end up being a very effective feature.


The Intelligent Resolution technology is another feature of the Venus Engine FHD and precisely performs signal processing pixel by pixel in the most effective way for it. As a result, images are naturally clear and crisp in both photo and MOVIE recording.
Linking smoothly with the Live MOS sensor, the Venus Engine FHD processes the large amount of signals at high speed, making it possible to record high resolution consecutive shots and full-HD movie recording.



If only they had left the sensor output at 25 FPS for PAL countries we would not have had any complaining about not having a 25p mode.


"Now the DMC-GH2 can record high-resolution full-HD 1,920 x 1,080 movies in astonishing smooth 60i (NTSC) / 50i (PAL), doubling the sensor output from 24p / 25p to 60p / 50p."
 
Last edited:
Just trying to post and help others. I have reported on my findings for years here... I've been on board since the original DVX100 and shouted its praises across the universe when it was released. Before that I was part of Chris hurd's shouting the p[raises of the Xl1, but it fell flat for me.. but at least it had a weird kinda 30p that sorta kind half assed looked better than 60i. If you look hard enough, you can find original posts of me begging for someone to make a 24p camera sometime back in 1998 when I was just a sperm.... on usenet.. and I had a sony vx1000 and then canon xl1.. xl2... the HVX was almost there but blurry with its weird scaling....

But as they say in Spaceballs "we're at NOW now.. when did we pass then? ... just now!"
 
Last edited:
see the faces of the guys on the bikes...they block out as they ride across.

I converted that clip to Cineform avi and stepped through it at 1:1 pixels, frame by frame. For the life of me, I cannot see blocking in the faces - it looks great! How were you inspecting the footage?
 
The faces to me are not really the issue, the blocking is in the walls and shadow detail on the left wall, and on the wall with the shadow of the tree and the sign on the right side of the frame there is a lot of blocky mush and breakup.
 
Ahh.. another native MTS file - thank you! Interestingly enough - this footage is running at EXACTLY 24.000 mbit... I will have to check if it is constant or not but I believe it is... interesting.. perhaps the other footage was shot in normal FHD mode and this is the 24 cinema mode....

Now this is very beautiful - and usable in a film, however, there is little to no movement. These are like the first shots that wowed everyone off of the original GH1 - and then everyone got home and started shooting complex movement and went WHAAAT?

So... again, I stand by my verdict.. the GH2 will shoot some incredible images if there is not a lot of detail or movement, but the codec can not handle what the GH1.3 hacked can - high amounts of detail moving.. so if you buy a GH2 just be aware of that. While bitrate is NOT everything, it does matter - it's extra space to store the data of the movement, and when that space runs out - which it can pretty quickly at 24 mbit.. you will get mush. Not as bad as the original gh1 mud.. but mud none the less. The GH1.3 hacked still uses a very intelligent avchd codec - so many time even if you are set for 50mbit, it still only is running at 20 or 25 on close ups, lock down shots with little movement.. ect.. it isn't a constant bitrate setting.. it only uses the bitrate when it needs it for movement, so shooting a shot of moving whiskers and fur, and rustling leaves in fall, I have gotten it up to about 52 mbits.... and THAT is where it makes a HUGE difference... the GH2 has nowhere to go for all that extra detail, and so you are gonna get mush. Now if the hdmi out is uncompressed and usable, I guess you could compress to a better codec.. but thats a whole other ballgame and hassle. I am reporting on the camera as is, not with other weird hookups.


I don' t understand one thing with your thinking. You are in for the best quality image for the big screen as you said and said again from the start of this thread. But when someone comes out and tells you that we could get uncompressed hdmi out of the gh2, that you can record at much higher bitrate and codec than the GH13, you just dismiss it with 'not with other weird hookups'. I don' t find a GH2 with and atomos ninja (proress 4.2.2) as a weird hookup at all even in terms of weight and size. When the price of the gh2 settles, you could get both for less than $ 1800, a little more than a bare canon 7d. In fact you have invested in 3 gh13, I don't think the money talk is that important to you at this level of investment. A more DIY guy could build a small pc or use a USB 3 laptop with blackmagic card to record even better in cineform codec.

If you see the Af-100 thread you will see that connecting to the hdmi or Hd-sdi is no weird hookups theory for whom claims he want the best picture quality. Lots of them are gearing to do so. If in the end we do really have uncompressed Hdmi, then for me the hack would be a moot point to a certain level (when someone can invest in an atomos for example). More importantly for me for the hack would be 25p as I am in Pal land.
 
I don' t understand one thing with your thinking. You are in for the best quality image for the big screen as you said and said again from the start of this thread. But when someone comes out and tells you that we could get uncompressed hdmi out of the gh2, that you can record at much higher bitrate and codec than the GH13, you just dismiss it with 'not with other weird hookups'. I don' t find a GH2 with and atomos ninja (proress 4.2.2) as a weird hookup at all even in terms of weight and size. When the price of the gh2 settles, you could get both for less than $ 1800, a little more than a bare canon 7d. In fact you have invested in 3 gh13, I don't think the money talk is that important to you at this level of investment. A more DIY guy could build a small pc or use a USB 3 laptop with blackmagic card to record even better in cineform codec.

If you see the Af-100 thread you will see that connecting to the hdmi or Hd-sdi is no weird hookups theory for whom claims he want the best picture quality. Lots of them are gearing to do so. If in the end we do really have uncompressed Hdmi, then for me the hack would be a moot point to a certain level (when someone can invest in an atomos for example). More importantly for me for the hack would be 25p as I am in Pal land.

You may be quite correct here Dan. I don't know enough about this method of doing things yet, and I am surely going to investigate it. I don't know what atomos ninja is and I am not a mac based editor so I don't mess much with prores either.. I'm on PC as I find mac very unfriendly to avchd and blu-ray in general even though I know everyone worships final cut. I do have clients who are mac based though and usually end up giving them cineform files.

It was my understanding that something was crippled on the hdmi out of the GH2... if it really is not... I shall have to investigate further into what you are talking about. Do you mean bringing a laptop with you as you shoot to or is this some device?

Time to get on google I guess...

Again, this was just me, finally getting a hold of the GH2 for a few hours, shooting what I knew would be difficult codec testing footage, and reporting my results as compared to the same footage on my hacked GH1.3 I really didn't have enough time to extensively test hdmi and every single setting, I just tested the 1080 24p settings.
 
I've just had a very close look at that GH2 shot in the Japanese street with the green trees in Vegas... I see what you mean about there being artifacts in the lower left hand corner. The leaves there also appear to be at half the framerate, weirdly enough.

BUT, I'm not sure if this scene would look any better with a GH13, as there's still that weird low-light smoothing that goes on. I expect that there would be a lot less detail on the walls and such on the GH13. As it's been mentioned, there's always HDMI so it gives it a sort of upgrade path for later.

richtrav's clip looks fantastic though. I can't find anything at fault with it.http://www.dvxuser.com/member.php?49655-richtrav
 
Yes, that clip does look fantastic - I'd go as far as to say it's the best GH2 footage I have seen so far...but there's really no movement except for the one wide of the trees.... but even that.. there isn't that much tree movement going on... if he zoomed a little onto a blowing tree, then we'd see. In any case - just reporting what I found... and learning as I go like the rest of us. I looked up the atomos ninja device and it does look interesting and promising if in fact hdmi out is completely unhindered.. but it kinda sucks for me because I'm not a mac person.... is there a box like this that records to cineform?
 
The faces to me are not really the issue, the blocking is in the walls and shadow detail on the left wall, and on the wall with the shadow of the tree and the sign on the right side of the frame there is a lot of blocky mush and breakup.

I must have bad eyes. In the Cineform transcode I see nothing like that - just mild moire on some of the fine lines like the 2nd storey window frame, and the exposed wires on the pole bottom right. There's a flicker when the girl's flash goes off, but that's real. I will make the modest suggestion that what some people are seeing may in part relate to how the footage is being decoded during viewing. In any case, based on Hinjuju's three clips the camera looks to be fine for my needs. Other people's mileage will obviously vary.
 
The GH-2 live HDMI out gets a red recording dot in the upper right, and a counter for the time the last time I saw it. If that remains in, it would be very annoying to deal with. Now you may be able to record the live view with nothing on it but I'm not sure about that.

If you think about the AF100 in this way it got me wondering, if the normal codec looked as good as the hd sdi out or hdmi out maybe it isn't that the native codec is so good (it's still amazing) it's that the video out is crippled to the point of almost making it not worth using for recording for high quality, using them for monitoring or redundant recording in case of SD card failure would still make sense. but I guess we will see all these things when the final release happens. And I don't know I haven't taken either cams footage into post and pushed and pulled it to it's limits (who knows maybe the hdmi/sdi out's biggest benifit is color) to see what they can handle so I guess I will wait until they are final and in my hands for testing.
 
I must have bad eyes. In the Cineform transcode I see nothing like that - just mild moire on some of the fine lines like the 2nd storey window frame, and the exposed wires on the pole bottom right. There's a flicker when the girl's flash goes off, but that's real. I will make the modest suggestion that what some people are seeing may in part relate to how the footage is being decoded during viewing. In any case, based on Hinjuju's three clips the camera looks to be fine for my needs. Other people's mileage will obviously vary.

Just to be sure.. I did a cineform HQ transfer as well, and it's still there... on the right side especially.. look at the shadow of the tree on the stone wall... the wall is breaking up and blocking, the white sign is breaking up.. there's aliasing.. it's ugly... I am looking at this on a 24 inch 1080p monitor. You won't necessarily see it in still frame stepping.. you have to watch it real time and see it garble the wall and sign...
 
Please can we stop this madness. The Gh2 is what a lot of filmmakers will be using and nothing wrong with that. It just seems like you are making yourself the authority on this issue and that if others disagree with what they see then they are wrong. I love the look of the gh1.3 but for my needs I will hands down be adding the gh2 to my beloved 5d. In all honesty it certainly surpasses my 5d in sharpness and that is big for me when doing projections of my projects.
 
Just to be sure.. I did a cineform HQ transfer as well, and it's still there... on the right side especially.. look at the shadow of the tree on the stone wall... the wall is breaking up and blocking, the white sign is breaking up.. there's aliasing.. it's ugly... I am looking at this on a 24 inch 1080p monitor. You won't necessarily see it in still frame stepping.. you have to watch it real time and see it garble the wall and sign...

Run that one by me again... if the 'breaking up' is not visible stepping 'frame by frame', how can it be the originating 'codec', vs the display decoding?
 
Clark - meaning.. in a still image.. you might just think that is how the wall cracks or looks... or whatever.. where as in the moving image, you can clearly see it is not the design of the wall itself, but weird blocks shifting and doing odd stuff that.. well... as far as I know... stone walls don't do.. unless you are on some fine grade peyote cactus....

Reem, calm down your boobies... this is what we do here on these forums...we geek out over pixels and codecs... it's not madness....well.. ok it is a little bit of madness..but that's the passion that keeps us going... it's a fun madness to strive higher and better...DON'T LEAVE ONE PIXEL BEHIND MAN NOT A ONE! :)

And I never said I was the authority on anything..... just trying to get common ground here... I see a wall breaking up and blocking and the sign and pipe having mud issues as well on the right side of the native mts clip and transcoded to cineform clip...

wait a second.. there is also some image breakup in your avatar icon..... and my hands.. and the floor.. and the sky is falling...... oh my god I did take that peyote....

Never mind the GH2 is perfect it's the cactus... bad ... cacti....

HOW MANY OF YOU PEOPLE REALLY KNOW YOU'RE ALIVE?!?!?

 
Last edited:
While bitrate is NOT everything, it does matter - it's extra space to store the data of the movement, and when that space runs out - which it can pretty quickly at 24 mbit.. you will get mush. Not as bad as the original gh1 mud.. but mud none the less. The GH1.3 hacked still uses a very intelligent avchd codec - so many time even if you are set for 50mbit, it still only is running at 20 or 25 on close ups, lock down shots with little movement.. ect.. it isn't a constant bitrate setting.. it only uses the bitrate when it needs it for movement, so shooting a shot of moving whiskers and fur, and rustling leaves in fall, I have gotten it up to about 52 mbits.... and THAT is where it makes a HUGE difference...
Yes, that is indeed the crux of the issue with any AVCHD codec implementation, GH1, GH2, or AF100. The burning question is not whether the GH2's B-frame codec running at 24Mbps is "good enough". What we need to know is what effect it has on image quality when the codec runs out of bitrate while encoding highly detailed, rapid-motion images. Does the AVCHD encoder subtly reduce detail in a nearly imperceptible manner, or does it produce visible blotches of mud large enough to be noticeable?

I remain skeptical of the effectiveness of B-frames in the GH2's FHD mode, regardless of its bitrate. With the GH1's non-B-frame AVCHD codec, P-frames are compressed using motion vectors from previous frames. In the GH2's 1080p24 mode, B-frames may use motion vectors from both previous frames and the next I-frame in the future. In practice, however, the encoder's long-GOP format leaves a half-second gap between key frames, within which a large amount of motion can occur. For B-frames in the first half of each GOP, the time interval to the next I-frame is large enough that fast-action shots may provide few I-frame macroblocks that can be reused in the preceeding B-frames. In extreme cases, this would effectively demote B-frames into P-frames, negating their improved coding efficiency at times when it is most needed.
 
Last edited:
Holy lord krishna..... let me read that one more time with my thinking cap on....

DocBrownB.6.14.06.jpg


I.... I need an advil.
 
@S.Matthew: There's a clip online that shows ALL the live HDMI displays, including the red dot, being turned off on a Japanese-language retail GH2. If I find the clip I'll come back with a link.

Edit: Here's the link - displays can be disabled while in record mode: http://vimeo.com/16554089
 
Last edited:
Nice! :thumbsup:

One question - what the hell is this "mud" that oozes over GH1 users? It sounds like some kind of low contrast/low resolution smearage?

It is exactly as you say. Originally pre hack the GH1 was riddled with it when recording fast motion. The codec couldn't keep up and made stuff up. However the GH13 is heaps better. It still has a problem with shadow detail or anything underexposed. I have examples of shaded patches of grass that lose all detail when filming with a tripod. Yes I know that sounds weird but it happens. However I recently shot some stuff and it looks spectacular for a consumer camera.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top