GH13 far superior to GH2

Lucas Adamson said:
Thanks LPowell. You're right - that is exactly the dysfunctional part I am referring to, and your workaround, appreciated though it is, is sadly not offering me much comfort. It's a right pain in the ass frankly, and makes me wonder how they released it like this - did they even test it out?

You can of course press the trash button, and then the display button FOR EACH DAMN SHOT (Ahem, sorry to shout...) to get the effect of the shutter speed on the shot displayed as it should be. If anybody knows how to get this on permanently then PLEASE let me know...
Click to expand...

Easiest thing is to use a manual lens.. Gives you exact display on LCD as the camera cannot mess around with aperture.
 
it's getting pretty futile, if a few GH13's are somehow better than GH2.
if there are such big differences between one GH13 and another, what's the point of debating on quality?
it looks like all GH2s functioning the same, while there's about 5-10 GH13 out there that are mysteriously above the rest.
SO ?
compering qualities needs to be done according to the 'regular' 95% of the GH13s.
 
. Quality varies a lot between ghetto streets and fancy streets. I had June 2009 model. My current Dec 2010 model has much better sensor.
Click to expand...

This is my experience too. My "late" GH13 just sings ! I am stunned by the far better (actual not by product of aliasing) resolution compared with my AF101 (AF100).
 
Blackout said:
Again I pose the challenge to show me GH2 footage with massive detail in motion without blockies and weirdness in some areas. I have not yet seen this. Always in high detail and various shading shots I have seen GH2 codec issues. Don't show me a tripod shot where only a few parts of the image are moving.
Click to expand...

Hey Michael,

I think I have what you want ;-) Did some tests with GH13 mounted on top of GH2, because I was curious of the strobing and dark area detail issue. Will post and let you guys know.
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread...36#post2308936


best regards, Gunther
 
Last edited:
roei z said:
it's getting pretty futile, if a few GH13's are somehow better than GH2.
if there are such big differences between one GH13 and another, what's the point of debating on quality?
it looks like all GH2s functioning the same, while there's about 5-10 GH13 out there that are mysteriously above the rest.
SO ?
compering qualities needs to be done according to the 'regular' 95% of the GH13s.
Click to expand...

Someone needs a chill pill...dont worry your precious GH2 is okay. okay?
The only difference between some gh1 models are lowlight banding and fpn...considering the GH2 has a different banding issue (actually like gh1s before... some might do some might not) I think its fair enough to make comparisons.

Have you ever owned a hacked GH1?

Methinks its only getting pretty futile to those GH2 owners who get annoyed when some others are happy with the quality they get from their GH1's ;-)

Why do GH2 owners get so uptight? GH1 & GH2 are both great cameras...but not leaps apart image wise.
 
mimirsan said:
Someone needs a chill pill...dont worry your precious GH2 is okay. okay?
The only difference between some gh1 models are lowlight banding and fpn...considering the GH2 has a different banding issue (actually like gh1s before... some might do some might not) I think its fair enough to make comparisons.

Have you ever owned a hacked GH1?

Methinks its only getting pretty futile to those GH2 owners who get annoyed when some others are happy with the quality they get from their GH1's ;-)

Why do GH2 owners get so uptight? GH1 & GH2 are both great cameras...but not leaps apart image wise.
Click to expand...

i am not frustrated at all, it's just seems a bit weird to take better than everage GH13 'mutations' into account (in this particular thread),
unless i got it all wrong and most of the GH13 are performing THAT good (NOT the case from all the footage I'VE seen)
BTW i am not defending my 'precious' GH2, i will tear it down and proudly tell about it's defects (and it HAS quite a few), so no chill pill for me ;)
 
Last edited:
Blackout said:
Even the shots on the AF-100 are giving me concern.. such as many of the ones of the chinese man drawing.. his face is full of weird little artifacts...
Click to expand...

You may want to look at some recent footage being shot with the AF100 instead of being concerned about footage shot with a pre-production camera by people who hadn't had a chance to play with the settings. There's some excellent work being done with the AF100 now that people have had the opportunity to tweak the settings.

Statements like the above are not what I'd expect from someone with your keen level of interest in the best possible image quality. Surely you've at least taken a peek at some of the footage that has been posted since the clip referenced above. Pointing out that footage as an example of something to be concerned about regarding the image quality of the AF100 is either kind of a cheap shot or a bit myopic.
 
roei z said:
if there are such big differences between one GH13 and another, what's the point of debating on quality?
it looks like all GH2s functioning the same, while there's about 5-10 GH13 out there that are mysteriously above the rest.
Click to expand...
I agree on the futility of debating the fine points of the two cameras. From the comparisons I've examined, it looks like it's quite a challenge to demonstrate significant distinctions in image quality that cannot otherwise be attributed to differences in exposure or framing. I've also seen no hard evidence of dramatic variations among GH1 units. I've used three GH1's, all hackable and bought many months apart, and after taking many hundreds of test shots, I've never noticed any differences between them. I also have a GF1 and a G2, which share the same sensor design, and I can easily observe the differences between them and the GH1's.
 
lpowell said:
I agree on the futility of debating the fine points of the two cameras. From the comparisons I've examined, it looks like it's quite a challenge to demonstrate significant distinctions in image quality that cannot otherwise be attributed to differences in exposure or framing. I've also seen no hard evidence of dramatic variations among GH1 units. I've used three GH1's, all hackable and bought many months apart, and after taking many hundreds of test shots, I've never noticed any differences between them. I also have a GF1 and a G2, which share the same sensor design, and I can easily observe the differences between them and the GH1's.
Click to expand...
I agree, and also if you change for example the "film" settings, you see a bigger difference than changing the cams. They are very close.
In the audio world, ppl debate about which converters sound better, like for example SACD vs 24/96. Ppl claim life-changing experiences in the sound. But when a scientific, double blind study was done, ppl could not only NOT tell the difference between SACD and 24/96 pcm--they could not tell the difference between SACD and regular CDs.
The reason I bring this up is that there is a perceptual margin, and once you are within that perceptual margin, you need to rule out the observer using a double-blind system.
For me, these two cams are within that margin.
 
DrDave said:
...you need to rule out the observer using a double-blind system.
Click to expand...

Righto; you delete your Vimeo account and I'll set fire to the broadband relay box at the end of my street. You can't get much more scientific than that!
 
I use ipowells blackout 24p.Its working out great,getting an average of 40mbps.However since I have 2gh1s I placed a 28mm 2.8 contax G lens on one and a 28mm 2.8 FD lens on the other. With a same settings and conditions they yielded bitrates. When I used the 2 lenses in the same camera, it was constant.The FD lens yielded a much higher bitrate count than the contax G lens. So I conclude that it is the lens itself that makes the difference and not the camera.
 
If it weren't for the FPN, I'd say that the GH1/3 is a better video camera OVERALL than the GH2 when the price is taken into account.

I couldn't stand the FPN on my GH1 (it was really bad, and showed up in all skin tones that weren't overexposed), so the GH2 is sadly the only option for me, unless I happen to come across a banding free GH1... boy will that be the day, though.
 
blues said:
I use ipowells blackout 24p.Its working out great,getting an average of 40mbps.However since I have 2gh1s I placed a 28mm 2.8 contax G lens on one and a 28mm 2.8 FD lens on the other. With a same settings and conditions they yielded bitrates. When I used the 2 lenses in the same camera, it was constant.The FD lens yielded a much higher bitrate count than the contax G lens. So I conclude that it is the lens itself that makes the difference and not the camera.
Click to expand...

That would suggest that the Canon lens is sharper, given that all criteria were the same, including f stop, focus etc. Did you do it really scientifically? More detail = more data. QED, innit!
 
I've seen some amazing videos from both the GH1 and the GH2 and the main difference between the two is the person operating the camera/editing the footage.

Some of this pixel peeping is really insane.

For people who say that once the GH2 gets hacked, the hacked GH1 will lose its value - why?!
That line of thought only reiterates that some people view this as some sort of contest. They're independent of each other; the image will still be good on the GH1, despite whatever the GH2 will/won't look like.

The issue remains; what will be done with it (whatever you have)?
 
Blackout said:
Use what works for you. Use a Fisher Price my first camcorder PXL 2000 camera that records to high bias cassette tape if you like the look. It has a way of making everything look like old war footage found from a vault then transferred to tape.



Click to expand...

Great. Wish I had one of these. I think David Lynch used it in Lost Highway for some scenes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top