GH2 GH1 vs GH2

[Stevet]

I would not look at anybodys data regarding noise levels... You can, but you will NEVER be certain (or confident) until you try it yourself.

Set up your own test with fixed lighting and test it yourself. Try maintaining (variable ND filiter) the same exposure under various ISO settings.
If you use the shutter to change the exposure, it will (or may) add another component on how the same noise level is perceived.

Also, try this same test targeting under exposed images (say 1 stop under, 2 stops under.. you get the idea)

 

[Wolfenbarg]

I found the GH1 to be very noisy past 800.. almost unusable and the lack of HDMI out and the lack of teleconverter makes it a huge oversight and not usable in a lot of situations.... I passed on it even with all of the fan boy adoration but the GH2.. what a friggin lovely camera hacked or unhacked. I can't wait for the Gh2 and if it shoots 1080 60p then that's enough of a reason for me to upgrade....

Even 800 is pushing it. My footage and even stills tend to be pretty ugly past ISO 640 unless there is enough light on the sensor. However, in those cases there isn't really a point to increase the ISO. I don't know which noise profile looks better of the two, but there certainly isn't less noise in the GH1's image...

 

[blazer003]

Well, here is the test that I was referencing when I said that 640ISO was cleanest. It looks fairly definitive if you ask me, but obviously this may not be true across the board for all settings/hacks/unhacked/etc. With this setup, however 640 stands up as cleanest in every test.

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...-test-w-Quantum-beta-V9b.-Interesting-results.

Before a couple of days ago...640 was. It's certainly not true anymore. I believe the winner is ISO 320.

I too want to know why this is not true any more? I want to shoot at the best ISO possible! Thanks!

 

[DrDave]

A soundproofed room with no equipment in it is the least noisy.

But rather drab and boring.

A soundproofed room will reveal all the awful noise of your microphone--background noise is a different kind of noise.

 

[chrisso]

Was going to buy a GH2. Maybe I should try one of the latest GH1 hacks first. I loaded one of the earlier stable hacks a couple of years ago, which has been great, so I didn't want to fix something that wasn't broke.

 

[mpgxsvcd]

Well, here is the test that I was referencing when I said that 640ISO was cleanest. It looks fairly definitive if you ask me, but obviously this may not be true across the board for all settings/hacks/unhacked/etc. With this setup, however 640 stands up as cleanest in every test.

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...-test-w-Quantum-beta-V9b.-Interesting-results.



I too want to know why this is not true any more? I want to shoot at the best ISO possible! Thanks!

Why are each one of those squares so different? If you truly wanted to do a 1:1 comparison then each square should look identical in exposure and white balance. The only thing that should vary is noise.

Over at dpreview they have done a vary controlled measurement on stills and ISO 160 is the base and has the lowest noise. Followed by ISO 320 and then 640. Everything else is just a digital gain.

 

[DrDave]

I'm curious why the color is so different. After all, color channels have different noise levels.

 

[brunerww]

Was going to buy a GH2. Maybe I should try one of the latest GH1 hacks first. I loaded one of the earlier stable hacks a couple of years ago, which has been great, so I didn't want to fix something that wasn't broke.

Chris,

I just picked my GH1 up this morning for the first time in a while. That EVF is really bad in low light. I would get a GH2 just to fix that (and for the Extended Tele Converter & the audio monitors on screen & the live HDMI out in record mode, &... )

But if your current GH1 hack is giving you what you need, you should just go out and use it to shoot your movie. A new GH1 hack isn't going to do that much to improve your images, in my view - while an upgrade to the GH2 will not only give you better performance in low light, it will also remove some of the barriers that the GH1 puts in the way.

Good luck with your decision.

Cheers,

Bill

 

[chrisso]

Bill,
Thanks for taking the time.
Good thoughts.

 

[Ian-T]

I too want to know why this is not true any more? I want to shoot at the best ISO possible! Thanks!

Here's one of the threads that I was talking about in my PM.

http://www.personal-view.com/talks/...users-liking-320-and-640-please-look.#Item_22

There is some other information in this thread about using the "indoors" white balance instead on manual or auto etc. This to me also works to get clean shots but the problem is using it outdoors because everything turns blue and you would need to fix it in post. So using this method outdoors might not be a solution. Ralph B first pointed out this trick months back stating that the red channel is the culprit for the noise we see. But there is more to the story I believe....which involves the "ISO Bug trick." It might be a pain in the but to use....but so far it seems like it works on ISO320/640/1250.

As LPowell stated in that thread:

Right, navigate horizontally across the center row of standard ISO's (200, 400, 800...) and then click up to select 160, 320, 640... The bottom row is always noiser than the center or top row

In other words....start from the second row (the even row) and work your way up.

 

[Lucas Adamson]

Well, here is the test that I was referencing when I said that 640ISO was cleanest. It looks fairly definitive if you ask me, but obviously this may not be true across the board for all settings/hacks/unhacked/etc. With this setup, however 640 stands up as cleanest in every test.

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...-test-w-Quantum-beta-V9b.-Interesting-results.



I too want to know why this is not true any more? I want to shoot at the best ISO possible! Thanks!

The one thing that has changed is that people have realised, and it has been verified by all that have tried (over at Vitaliy's site), that the route by which you access 320 ASA, and indeed all the "top row" ASA settings, results in wildly different noise levels. For example, if you go to 320ASA from the middle row, it ill be MUCH cleaner than if you arrive at it from the right on the top row. Before you call me nuts, TRY IT!

Also, the reason that 160 is not considered the cleanest is because it has unique banding issues.

 

[Ian-T]

^^^What he said^^^

 

[Cosimo Bullo]

Glad to see info making its way around. The original test was clearly bitten by arriving at 320 by way of the top row. Go by way of 1600, 800, 400, and you'll see it's cleaner than 640.

Viva 320!