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

Status
Not open for further replies.
mapombo said:
It seems I have to express myself in more words to be fully undertstood:
It's worse in what relates to image quality. It's the worse Pixel Pitch by far of any decent SLR. It was a pure marketing play to increase it's resolution. Every single one interested in image quality would have chosen to keep resolution and just increase maximum scan speed
Click to expand...

And?
For video it is irrelevant. For stills also, if you are not PP.
All this rants about increasing resolution are so old.

[*]Maximum scan speed seems to have increased, though it remains to be proven the GH1 sensor cant achieve it as well
Click to expand...

It can't :-)

[*]24pn was already on GH13, just required some tuning in the algorithm, so sensor was up to it. Should they have not come up with GH2, there would be by now several developers implementing multiple ReFrames and CABAC in GH13, even in ASM!
Click to expand...

Native 24p is not related to sensor. It is encoder, and 24p encoder in GH2 is rewritten and use added hardware.
Plus due to scanning speed rolling shutter is better.

Fast Focus: comes with increaded scan speed
Click to expand...

It is not correct.
Increased speed comes from double fps in LV, new algorithms and updated lens firmwares.

High ISO/Low lighr performance: This is done in software. Would have been achieved also in GH13
Click to expand...

Normally in all current camera LSI very little is done in software. :-)
So, it is hardware changes mostly.

Manual Audio Levels: Soon to have been done in GH13
Click to expand...

You are working on this? :-)

Telephoto: No big deal, easy to implement in GH13 on a later stage
Click to expand...

BS. All all of your post.
 
Check your sources. Most of what you state is wrong:
  • Sensor outputs pixels, period! Worse picture, worse video, though better aliasing due to increased resolution (remains to be confirmed). Old rants or not, pixel pitch on CMOS matters a lot. I'm a Physics Engineer, so I can demonstrate it for you if you want. And GH2 is one of the worse in this matter.
  • Increased scan speed on GH1 sensor: have you tried it?
  • 24pn is sensor related at it requires the sensor to be full-frame readable 24 times per second. Obviously, the rest is software
  • Higer ISO on GH2 does not come from sensor, it's been proved.
  • Firmware and software is the same thing!
  • Telephoto is just a different ratio sensor rescale, by all means not Rocket Science!

But you lacked the guts to state your oppinion on my recomendations.
I urge you!
 
Agreed. Either contribute something or leave. Thanks.

God I can't believe I just wasted my 3,000th post on that.
 
Definitely not the same.

More sophisticated AA filter, less aliasing, less mud, higher quality encoding, built-in ND filter, higher quality evf, etc.

Only if I'm filthy rich...
 
I don't know about pros, but GH2 seems like a nice upgrade for casual users. My only concern is hit-or-miss quality control as GH1 has QC issue. In some cases banding at ISO 400 sounds horrid.

K-5 got #1 cropped sensor but no 60p. D7000 is having hot pixel issue. 60D is crippled 7D. What else? I want reliable 24pN and 60p and no banding. If the banding is mitigated mostly by in-body software, so what? That's one less step in post-processing.

One thing for sure is that resale value of GH13 will go down rapidly as the launching date approaches although we know what GH13 can do that GH2 cannot do for now.
 
Vitaliy Kiselev said:
I don't see here any mention of 120fps focusing in 24fps mode.
It is just impossible.
120fps is special mode used in liveview.
Click to expand...

Would it be possible to record this 120fps mode via hdmi? Also any idea if the build quality is improved with the GH2? I always worried about the strap lugs breaking off with my 14-140mm attached. Cheers.
 
mpgxsvcd said:
That is some real nice footage there. So theoretically what differences would we expect to see if this clip had been shot with a GH2?
Click to expand...

Hmmm...have to admit you've got me stumped there. I've never seen any theoretical footage shot with the GH2.
 
mpgxsvcd said:
That is some real nice footage there. So theoretically what differences would we expect to see if this clip had been shot with a GH2?
Click to expand...
This clip was shot in overcranked 60p mode (shot as 1080/60p, recorded in 1080/24p "wrapper"). On stock GH2 60 frames per second @ 1920x1080 are only available in low-bitrate interlaced mode. So I would expect interlaced artifacts galore, mud on all the OOF foliage in the background, aliasing on the jacket and feather on the cap.

When we look at encoder characteristics, average bitrate of the stream is "only" 18 Mbps, however 4 reference frames (B-frames) are used with CABAC, which GH2 doesn't have. VK referred to 20-30% efficiency gains with this coding method. Camcorders, such as TM700 also employ CABAC. However, 60p stream is written "natively" at ~28Mpbs. AF100 uses an equivalent of 60 fps/24 fps *18Mbps = 45Mbps bitrate to encode similar stream.
00075 1080p60-in-24p-wrapper.jpg

In short, out-of-the box it is a better video-camera. Footage speaks for itself.

[Edit]
Barry Green posted details about overcranking, so footage is not 60p in 24p wrapper as initially thought, but more like 36p in 24p.
 
Last edited:
stonebat said:
No idea if GH2 can emit 120 fps via HDMI. But where would you get an external HDMI recorder that can do 120p?
Click to expand...
AFAIK, max frame-rate supported by HDMI protocol is 60Hz. Newish HDTV claim 120Hz refresh rates, but that is only the internal refresh rate -- "extra-smooth" 120Hz image gets interpolated from a 60Hz source signal by the TV. For all we know, 60p is not even supported at 1080 mode over HDMI cable. Phillip Bloom reported his prototype GH2 to produce in interlaced signal in live-view or 1080/60 modes. Perhaps richtrav can clarify how the production model operates.
 
Just two general comments for the last issues here.
1) The GH1 sensor and the GH2 sensor are different sensors if Panasonic is telling the truth. So they cannot be compared in the basis of same sensor with more pixels=worse quality. They changed the architecture of the sensor, or at least thats what they claim meaning that it has a different wiring and it gathers more light. Probably thats why the pixels are so many more but the drop in quality at least according to dxo is marginal. This different sensor combined with better processors and better software allows for much higher ISOs.
This might be bad for stills, since the RAW files will not be better but for video I think since most people will not record it unprocessed, it is a good thing.

2) Autofocus is faster because they readout from the sensor happens two times faster. This means that autofocus in stills is going to be as fast as they say. This is really good to shoot right when you want it and not when the moment is gone. For video it will be significantly slower but is it really a problem for video? I mean who wants to change focus in video in 0.1 sec? I think it would look bad.
 
All I can say is that all your posts are BS.
Click to expand...

There is always someone new trying to sound like an "expert" without any proof to that. Vitaly proved he is an EXPERT at what he does. The same thing with somebody that just shoots stuff then tests a new camera and declares it no good. The ONLY person I trust when testing a new camera is Barry Green and thats it. What he says goes because he is a proven EXPERT in this field. Technologically and visually. And that is why the camera companies go to proven professionals in the field to do the testing.
 
it's funny when people lecture vitaly about the gh13 hack. it should also be noted that the pixel peepers have already found "problems" with the af100 as well.
 
(sigh)....I'm not afraid of anything...typically. But I am afraid of giving an opinion in this forum sometimes...like now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top