GH2 For Color Grading: Hacked GH2 or Canon DSLRs...?

B

Breezer

Member
So I'm thinking of getting the GH2 to be able to push color grading farther than with my Canon... The better resolution and less compressed image of the Hacked GH2 (driftwood hack)
will obviously let me be more aggressive with the grading before the image falls apart. On the other hand however, I'm reading people say that the GH2 is not good for color grading because its latitude is worse than the Canons'...

Anyone with color grading experience with both cameras can shine some light on this?
 
Really?? C'mon....people really say that? Seriously....just think about that statement for a second (moment of silence.........). Now....doesn't that just resonate as being......silly??

I had both cameras......and nothing can be further from the truth. :)

Latitude has nothing at all to do with it.
 
I guess their main complaint is that because of the baked in look of the GH2, you'll lose details in the highlights and shadows versus a flat profile on the canon...
 
Colour grading between my GH2 and 60D… wow, I've never seen such a clear winner

Hint: the more info from the sensor, the easier it is
 
The image from a sensor that much smaller is going to fall apart compared to the 5D. They are both 8bit 4.2.0, so all things being equal the noise in the shadows and it's frequent inability to handle gradients pretty much insures that it is the loser. Now if it were 10bit 4.2.2 that would be another matter...

I have graded both and this is what I have found.

So sorry to disappoint all the GH2 fans here.

I do not know how it compares to the smaller sensors from the other Canon cameras.
 
Last edited:
I think it really depends on a lot of factors. The GH2 has a MUCH better image and cleaner noise. As for grading, Canon has the color profiles, and im assuming from what I just read... has a flatter image profile.
But from what i've been able to do with the GH2 using Nikon glass, im very happy with my ability to grade. Im not a pro-grader, so my grading isn't "pushing the limits"...
A simple trip over to Vimeo, and you can see hundreds of good and bad examples of color grading throughout the DSLR world. I think it comes down to technique and glass, more then anything.
 
Check out Part 2 of Philip Bloom's camera shootout, where he compares color correcting with the codecs in post.


The Hacked GH2 performed well, better than the AF100, but I honestly can't remember how the Canon counterparts did in that regard. Interesting comparison though.
 
In my experiments, I found the AF100 to have more latitude that the Canon 7D because of the shadows, and then more recently, because of the hack, there is more useable information in the Hacked GH2 than the AF100.

So yeah, you'll be fine.
 
Here are before and afters. Plenty of detail, grades like butter. Banding is much more pleasant because of the fine detail and adding a hint of noise helps even more, but the jpg doesn't help and without motion makes it look worse too. It's soft because it was shot at F2, wide open.

before

beforetk.jpg


http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/3028/beforetk.jpg


after

afterfn.jpg


http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/8342/afterfn.jpg
 
You're not really pushing it that far in your example.

Those whole idea that the bigger sensor in the Canons vs GH2 adds to detail is utter nonsense. Now, it wouldn't be nonsense if the image was properly scaled down to 1080 from the large sensor and the Canons used a better codec besides the half-assed implementation of H.264 (of which the higher bitrate merely serves to overcome the issues with that implementation). GH2 is AVCHD, hacked to include Intra frames (so they say) at a much, much higher bitrate. AVCHD is already a superior implementation of H.264, and it's way over twice the bitrate of the Canons. The GH2 downscales its image in a better way, and it all adds up to more detail being recorded.

The GH2 (and to a debatably lesser extent, the AF-100) can have a much better image overall over the Canons and is better for color grading.
 
The resolution is irrelevant when it comes to how far you can push grading.

It is the bit depth of the individual color values and the dynamic range of the sensor that will dictate the ability to be more extreme when grading. The bit rate of the codec, the size of the sensor, and the pixel count are all irrelevant.
 
fde101 said:
The resolution is irrelevant when it comes to how far you can push grading.

It is the bit depth of the individual color values and the dynamic range of the sensor that will dictate the ability to be more extreme when grading. The bit rate of the codec, the size of the sensor, and the pixel count are all irrelevant.
Click to expand...

I'd argue that bit rate does matter. How in Philip Bloom's example does the hacked GH2 grade so much better than the AF100? Both have similar sensors, codecs (4:2:0) both are 8 bit... similar dynamic range, as far as a I know. Heck , the af100 might even have more range. Yet GH2 grades better. Higher bitrate!
 
Higher bitrate means the file being written to your SD card can retain more information, especially in the areas that are pushing the highlights.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top