My ignorance if it has been said and I just have not seen it but was this a stock GH2 or hacked? If hacked which patch? I keep going back and forth with my canons and my gh2. I love the resolution of the gh2 but how finnicky the screen is with its color and exposure shifts when pressing record scares me from using it on anything paid.
GH2 GH-2 Takes On the RED Scarlet, and Lives... :-)
- Thread starter TheDingo
- Start date
Ian-T
Veteran
Bassman2003
Veteran
My take: Uderwhelmed by Scarlet in this delivery/viewing medium and just a little color correction to take the magenta cast out of the GH2 and they are basically equal. $1,500 to $10,000+ If your project mainly involves web or DVD then there is no need for expensive cameras. Maybe you would see more of a difference with a Blu-ray, but maybe not... Spend the money on glass as it is always needed.
I've been using mh GH-2 for paid jobs for almost one year now. Color is great ( I believe in post production as much as I do production ) and the detail is great, and clients keep telling me how amazing the finished work looks.
Before I bought my GH-2 I was working with a Canon 60D, and 2 months after buying the GH-2 I dumped all my Canon gear because it was obvious that I was never going to use it again for video work.
This is my exact story as well. I can't stand to look at Canon anymore, even with Zeiss glass.
I had to finish up a project after getting my GH2 that I shot on the Canon 60D, and I felt it held up well, though it was a project that was better for the lower resolution, dreamy look of the Canon as opposed to the harsh 1000 lines of resolution reality of the GH2.
...Given the choice, I prefer higher resolution video which can always be softened in post.
Going the other way, adding detail, really isn't an option.
vision_filmz
Carbonite Member
Personally I do not like footage from either camera in this video. Seems real soft , out of focus and neutral colors. More impressed recently with the Nikon d4 film, but that was an actual piece put together by a team....
Really have no idea what these tests prove, as it's basically pointless imo.
Really have no idea what these tests prove, as it's basically pointless imo.
Last edited:
I never said anything about its color. I'm talking about how the LCD monitor changes when you hit record. Idk about yours but my camera shifts shadows into the green and the exposure I have set all of a sudden becomes darker. And no I am not in automatic mode while doing this.
I never trust cheap monitors for anything other than composition and focus, which is why I invested in a Sekonic C-500 color meter.
It would be nice to have a better LCD to work with, but you get used to the GH-2 LCD after a while. Otherwise, you can buy a good external monitor but this will cost you almost as much ( or more ) than the GH-2 camera body did.
@TheDingo thanks for the tip I have a 7 inch marshall monitor but with doing run and gun music videos and trying to stay as low key as possible I try to strip everything down to the smallest setup to keep attention away from me.
@visionfilmz I'm with you on how neither of these shots were breathtaking or anything. I think what these tests do is give people who can't afford higher priced equipment (like me haha) a validation that their $700 camera is good enough to make movies that can be taken seriously with. I mean even in the case of a D4 you could buy 5-6 GH2s. Instead of putting vs. in these test they should just be called a bench mark measurement because we all know if money wasn't an issue we would hands down choose a scarlet over a gh2.
@visionfilmz I'm with you on how neither of these shots were breathtaking or anything. I think what these tests do is give people who can't afford higher priced equipment (like me haha) a validation that their $700 camera is good enough to make movies that can be taken seriously with. I mean even in the case of a D4 you could buy 5-6 GH2s. Instead of putting vs. in these test they should just be called a bench mark measurement because we all know if money wasn't an issue we would hands down choose a scarlet over a gh2.
Last edited:
William_Robinette
Shallow Member
Very true indeed. Lets say 2k then. Blow up the GH2 to 2k and downscale Scarlet to 2k. For s's and g's let to a bit of reframing or maybe stabilizing. Perhaps a little tracking for some sky replacement. Lets work with power masks and really start to massage the image into exactly what we want in the color suite through secondary and tertiary color selection and modification.
The GH-2 is amazing in what it has been able to achieve through the hacks. No question. It really has no right to be in this test at all yet it is. The thing is though, I see this to be much akin to how the Canon DSLRs just look fab on say a closeup @85mm but fall apart the more you pull out. This particular shot isn't that complex, both in composition and what the camera has to render out form it's sensor and in post processing. Is the GH-2 enough of a camera for probably 90% of people here? I'd say so, but let's not confuse that with it being as good as a $15,000 digital cinema camera because it's just not. And if you don't know, can't see, or can't rationalize where that extra $14,000 goes that is perfectly OK but don't think for a second that others can't or don't need it. Different tools for different jobs and it's a wonderful thing.
Edit: This isn't directed at anyone particularly, just some thoughts I have.
Sense has been made.
2k is basically HD with a bit more pixels on the sides.
This is why I am very keen on picking up the SmallHD DP4 EVF/monitor, as I am hoping it will be small enough to move around quickly with a video monopod, but still show a detailed enough image for easy focus.
Here's a link to small theatre interview I shot last week using my GH-2 on a video monopod, shooting with my Voightlander 25mm at f/2.0 for the interview, and Zeiss 85mm at f/2.8 for the puppets. Because I was traveling extra light ( no monitor or tripod ), I used the GH-2 LCD for focus and composition. Audio for the interview was a Sennheiser UHF hand-held mic fed directly in to my GH-2 camera. ( a little dangerous audio wise, but I know my gear well ) I shot the whole thing in 15 minutes, because I was being kicked out of the room so the Canadian national TV network ( 2 huge old-school ENG cameras on tripods ) could film their interview.
PositiveLite.Com with Ronnie Burkett
Barry_Green
Moderator
That's what the GH2 does. The simple takeaway is that you must never, ever make decisions based on what the live view LCD is telling you, because it is not accurate at all. You MUST be recording in order for the LCD to display anything worthwhile. Live view is ok for framing and focus, but definitely not for exposure, shadows, color or anything like that.
Correction on the color thing: if you match it back to a calibrated HdMi source it's fine for judging color. The only thing is the still present slight green shift, which is very strange because you can't defeat it in camera. I recorded the same image into and hd-sdi source and the green shift is not present.
Is this something thats inherent with avc-hd? Does it happen on the AF100? Or just Gh2?
Shadows on the other hand... Biggest liar.
Is this something thats inherent with avc-hd? Does it happen on the AF100? Or just Gh2?
Shadows on the other hand... Biggest liar.
Barry_Green
Moderator
That is also a gh2 issue. The LCD lies, even in record mode, it is just way better than when in live mode.
I posted a clip on my Vimeo page that shows the difference between what gets recorded, and what the monitor shows. It is not insubstantial.
It is not an AVCHD thing, because the AF100 is 100% perfectly faithful between what it records and what it displays.
It is a GH2 issue. It is a $899 stills/hybrid and you can only expect so much from it. Accurate monitoring (through its LCD or through its HDMI) is not something you can count on from it.
I posted a clip on my Vimeo page that shows the difference between what gets recorded, and what the monitor shows. It is not insubstantial.
It is not an AVCHD thing, because the AF100 is 100% perfectly faithful between what it records and what it displays.
It is a GH2 issue. It is a $899 stills/hybrid and you can only expect so much from it. Accurate monitoring (through its LCD or through its HDMI) is not something you can count on from it.