GH2... 24Mbps on all modes!!!
- Thread starter stonebat
- Start date
Using VMM .8x slo-mo mode on GH2 you already get 1080/30p @ 28.8 Mbps. 60p? Next version.
Phil Rhodes
Well-known member
That's quite an assumption, to be fair. The amount of effort required to implement and test such any new feature in a device like this, regardless of how theoretically capable the hardware is of offering that feature, is non trivial. If any manufacturer started releasing under-tested and potentially glitchy code, I suspect sites like this would explode with criticism.
I'm sorry, but your comment was entirely too sensical and reality-based for this forum.
Justyn
Veteran
Well who knows what they are working on as it's not been released yet as I was hoping to have it in my sweaty little hands. I think they'll see a huge demand for this camera so maybe things are changing... like the HDMI out. To me, that one upgrade is totally worth the camera. We'll soon see.
Camera Expert
Well-known member
What does that supposed to mean? For what I do, the GH2 is a far better camera but if non Panasonic workers are able to increase the bit rate on the GH1 without any issues than why can't actual Panasonic engineers do the same thing to the GH2? I'm taking about technical reasons, not political.
Am I missing something here?
Phil Rhodes
Well-known member
Time, money, managerial inclination. Same reason anything does or doesn't get done, by anyone, anywhere, on any project.
I really need to stop allowing myself to be wound up by the tinfoil hat wearers on this forum.
tflak
Veteran
And the last few times we "demanded" anything panny let out a loud "meh" and didn't do a single thing. They took some of our ideas and put them into the GH2 but they cherry picked those ideas and did what they wanted to do anyway. They ALREADY knew all of the things we wanted and they still do... However, I think they miss some of the points.
24mbps should be PLENTY for good and clean AVCHD. The talk of still seeing MUD with 24mbps AND B frames shows that there is still something wrong and/or crippled in the implementation. THAT is one thing that Panny *should* fix as it's a lingering problem from the GH1. Panny read that we wanted higher bitrates and B frames. What they *should* have read is that we want "MUD-free" images in all circumstances. That's more important than simply adding more bitrate and B frames for no reason.
Phil Rhodes
Well-known member
I think the idea that any major electronics manufacturer "took" anything whatsoever from any internet forum is, and I'm being kind here, a bit hopeful. Filmmakers are a vanishingly minute proportion of the potential market for these things and nobody is in a position to put development resources into pandering to their needs. If you want to talk about the AF-100, then fine, maybe, but I doubt that anyone on the GH2 team has any idea that this forum exists - and an AF-100 costs many times what a GH2 does while not actually containing significantly more advanced technology. This tells us something about the market economics of the situation.
Once again, we are not special, we are not all wonderful unique snowflakes, we're each one of six and a bit billion people on this ball of rock and our personal frustrations are proportionally unimportant.
Once again, we are not special, we are not all wonderful unique snowflakes, we're each one of six and a bit billion people on this ball of rock and our personal frustrations are proportionally unimportant.
It's been mentioned by someone here that Panny employees on the GHX team have noticed this forum. No names or specifics were mentioned though.
We also know that Panny commercial products employees maintain forum memberships and chime in on discussions every now and then as well.
We also know that Panny commercial products employees maintain forum memberships and chime in on discussions every now and then as well.
Peter J. DeCrescenzo
Veteran
Hi Phil Rhodes: Always great to see your smiling face! ;-)
For those of you who might not be familiar with Phil Rhodes' unique brand of communication: Phil may sound like a know-it-all curmudgeon, but in fact he really _is_ an honest-to-goodness know-it-all curmudgeon!
Er, I meant to say is: Phil has forgotten more about video technology than I'll ever know. Which, um ... the part about me is perhaps not surprising?
Anyhoo, Phil I have a question:
While we wait for reliable confirmation about the GH2's live HDMI signal quality, given that the GH2 seems to output some form of HDMI live video, can you briefly describe some of the ways a manufacturer might "screw-up" an HDMI signal so as to render it unsuitable for external capture/recording -- even though it "works" for monitoring?
For example, I believe HDMI can carry a copy-inhibit bit/flag (copy protection) if the designers want it, but what else is sometimes done to make external HDMI recording impossible or impractical, either on purpose by design or accidentally through bad design? Just curious, thanks!
For those of you who might not be familiar with Phil Rhodes' unique brand of communication: Phil may sound like a know-it-all curmudgeon, but in fact he really _is_ an honest-to-goodness know-it-all curmudgeon!
Er, I meant to say is: Phil has forgotten more about video technology than I'll ever know. Which, um ... the part about me is perhaps not surprising?
Anyhoo, Phil I have a question:
While we wait for reliable confirmation about the GH2's live HDMI signal quality, given that the GH2 seems to output some form of HDMI live video, can you briefly describe some of the ways a manufacturer might "screw-up" an HDMI signal so as to render it unsuitable for external capture/recording -- even though it "works" for monitoring?
For example, I believe HDMI can carry a copy-inhibit bit/flag (copy protection) if the designers want it, but what else is sometimes done to make external HDMI recording impossible or impractical, either on purpose by design or accidentally through bad design? Just curious, thanks!
Last edited:
Well such was the euphoria with the hack it would be hard for anyone not to know about it, so yes the guys at Pana know all about this forum, 100%, but do they take notice, probably but they have a budget and technical limitations too, they are probably already up against it technically, yes they can do more but they dont always have the talent on-board or the budget do more, this may come with time but am sure with a huge coporate like Panasonic the technical team move between products and arent just there for the GH2? It matter very little to the majority as well because we can all see even with the limited bitrate what the GH2 is achievable of, and its very nice, especially if we can record outside the GH2, that will really be a cherry on top! yes its hassle and expense, but I think many will go that extra mile in pursuit of a better image, will the mud still be there in externally recorded footage and is it there now, honsestly I cant see it and I think even if it is its very much better than GH1 at launch, so we have a big improvement from day 1.
stonebat
Veteran
Like Canon vs Nikon, this is Panny vs Sony. Unlike Panny, Sony has been more aggressive on features, pricing, firmware updates, and product line-ups. See how much Sony has done this year. I speculate Sony A77 will implement better 24Mbps than GH2's. Panny might update a firmware when A77 becomes available next summer. Hopefully Panny stop being reactive. See what happened to GF2. Be proactive, Panny. Give us more good stuffs ASAP.