GH2 Deficiencies - A list of findings

[Barry_Green]

Considering AF100, I know that some people even inside Panasonic are extremely unhappy with marketing strategy used for AF100.
Form my POV, AF100 marketing and pushing is worst thing done by Panasonic in last years.

Your POV is of course your own, but after working the NAB booth for four days, it would seem that Panasonic themselves is quite happy with the marketing and the reception of the AF100. They've sold more AF100's in four months, than Red sold Red Ones in four years. At the "AF100 Accessories" section, it was typically packed six people across and five deep for the first three days. And Jan said the AF100's are sold out and in a backorder situation now.

You really don't have to try to tear down the AF100 in order to justify your GH2. The GH2 is a lovely product and I like mine very much. The AF100 is a lovely product and for me, it is well, well worth the price difference between it and the GH2. For Svart, it isn't. So why don't we both be happy -- those who think it is worth the price difference, can buy an AF100. Those who don't think it's worth the price difference, can buy a GH2. Everybody's happy then.

 

[Barry_Green]

Don't look now...

http://pro-av.panasonic.net/en/sales_o/broch_pdf/ag-hpx250.pdf

Projected retail price: $6,500

Yes - now let's examine it in context. The HPX250 will hit the market almost a year after the AF100 did -- about 10 months after, to be more precise. 10 months is a lot of time for things to change. And, the HPX250 is almost twice the physical size of the AF100.

Is it possible for them to fit the boardset and chips and everything from the HPX250 inside the AF100 body? I don't know, but they told us a year ago that it wasn't possible, so -- maybe what was possible a year ago, when they designed and built the AF100, isn't the same as what's possible a year later.

Does the HPX250 herald a change now that means that development of an P2/AVC-Intra version of the AF100 is more possible? I sure hope so. And maybe a year from now there might be such a product. But it really doesn't change anything about what they said about the AF100 when they said that -- it was a year premature and Jan said it would cost a whole heck of a lot more.

(and for those who are wondering where I'm getting "a year" from -- AF100 was announced at NAB 2010, and delivered December 2010. HPX250 was announced at NAB 2011, and will deliver likely October 2011. It's 10 months to a year newer.)

 

[Lpowell]

Does the HPX250 herald a change now that means that development of an P2/AVC-Intra version of the AF100 is more possible? I sure hope so. And maybe a year from now there might be such a product.

I totally agree, and would quickly sign up on that waiting list

 

[Vitaliy Kiselev]

Your POV is of course your own, but after working the NAB booth for four days, it would seem that Panasonic themselves is quite happy with the marketing and the reception of the AF100. They've sold more AF100's in four months, than Red sold Red Ones in four years. At the "AF100 Accessories" section, it was typically packed six people across and five deep for the first three days. And Jan said the AF100's are sold out and in a backorder situation now. .

At least now we know that aggressive marketing is working

You really don't have to try to tear down the AF100 in order to justify your GH2. The GH2 is a lovely product and I like mine very much. The AF100 is a lovely product and for me, it is well, well worth the price difference between it and the GH2. For Svart, it isn't. So why don't we both be happy -- those who think it is worth the price difference, can buy an AF100. Those who don't think it's worth the price difference, can buy a GH2. Everybody's happy then.

I think that pushing AF100 is really beyong any bounds, Barry.
I really like this camera, but I am sick of bunch of threads with sole purpose of describe same advantages again and again.
And doing this for people who do not need AF100 and won't buy AF100 anyway. Don't you find that it is kind of strange?

 

[pulpfiction007]

At least now we know that aggressive marketing is working



I think that pushing AF100 is really beyong any bounds, Barry.
I really like this camera, but I am sick of bunch of threads with sole purpose of describe same advantages again and again.
And doing this for people who do not need AF100 and won't buy AF100 anyway. Don't you find that it is kind of strange?

I think the advantages continue to be mentioned because people either compare the GH2 to the AF100, or they ask why the GH2 doesen't have certain features...or some even say the GH2 puts out the same image for much less money - So even if that is so, potential buyers still have to question what they need in a camera. ( That's where the biggest differences are - functionality for various scenarios/budgets/projects) The answer to the question is to point out what each camera offers...hence the advantages are mentioned.
Some will find the GH2 suits them perfectly...others will feel restricted by it's feature set.
It happens with any VDSLR vs. HMC150/XHA1s/Sony NX5U,etc discussion as well.

 

[Ian-T]

I really like this camera, but I am sick of bunch of threads with sole purpose of describe same advantages again and again.
And doing this for people who do not need AF100 and won't buy AF100 anyway. Don't you find that it is kind of strange?

I can agree with this. But in his defense I think he's just trying to counter the many claims by folks who are trying to make the GH-2 out to be what it's really not. But...yeah..it can get harsh up in here at times.

EDIT: pulpfiction you beat me to it.

 

[Barry_Green]

I think that pushing AF100 is really beyong any bounds, Barry.

I only mentioned it because you (and others) brought it up.

I think if people would stop with the whole ridiculous "you're stupid if you buy that one instead of this one" statements, then you'd find that a whole lot of the controversy would simply ... disappear.

Try it.

 

[Svart]

I don't straight up disagree with you on this...because camera features are a very subjective thing. Meaning one customer will be willing to pay a lot for features that another could care less about. It's easy to forget just how much more the AF100 offers for video purposes than the GH2, because the GH2 does such a good job already. But here's a list of things that might make it worth the roughly $3795 more for the AF100

1. 3 position ND filters (if your read the DSLR forums a lot you know the headaches people go through finding a good all around ND filter solution
2. The LCD on the AF100 is quite a bit better and is larger...the VF is also more ergonomic.
3. HD-SDI (ability to get 4:2:2 from a very reliable output is very important to some)
4. Overcranking/undercranking (this feature is priceless for many shooters)
5. Waveform + Vectorscope
6. Detail coring/numerous gammas/ much deeper control of the image parameters, etc
7. Uncompressed 16 bit audio recording capability/xlr inputs
8. Timecode/Synchro function
9. 6 Scene files for easily recalling adjustments
10. Dual card slots
11. Max bitrate available in way more modes than the GH2
12. More shooting modes on AF100 like 1080 30P, 720 24P, etc.
13. Remote control pricelesss for certain situations
14. Longer battery life/ Better batteries available
15. PAL/NTSC switchability
16. Zebras
17. Headphone jack
18. Negative gain function
19. Ergonomic features like the handle/ tape hook, etc
20. Slow synchro/High speed shutter - can be set by degree

I think I've missed some as well...and did not go into great detail on the image adjustments, which are vast. Remember also- this is 1 of only 2 cameras in existence under $13,000 to feature a roughly 35mm sized sensor and video camera form factor/features. The other is the FS100.
(The NEX VG10 is missing more options than the GH2 and Canon DSLR's ....so that's why I wouldn't count that one)

Also the AF100 is $4795 at one of the most reliable online vendors - B and H

And pretty much most of those features are simply software options..

 

[Boncrek]

And pretty much most of those features are simply software options..

1. Software costs money too.
2. High end software runs on high end hardware which also costs money.

Features (whether hard or soft) cost money.
Ergonomics and functionality cost money.
If that is not important to you then good for you.
To some it is.

 

[Vitaliy Kiselev]

I only mentioned it because you (and others) brought it up.
I think if people would stop with the whole ridiculous "you're stupid if you buy that one instead of this one" statements, then you'd find that a whole lot of the controversy would simply ... disappear.
Try it.

I don't even that to say here.
I had been in marketing for some time and all I see here is massive marketing company.
The most stupid marketing company I ever saw.

 

[Vitaliy Kiselev]

1. Software costs money too.
2. High end software runs on high end hardware which also costs money.

1. Can we get estimate about software costs?
2. I won't be so sure about high end hardware. Let's wait with this before tearing AF100 apart.

 

[dan.carter]

I don't even that to say here.
I had been in marketing for some time and all I see here is massive marketing company.
The most stupid marketing company I ever saw.

Bit of a shame Panasonic has been so successful selling the AF100, leaves fewer GH2 owners to be bombarded with posts concerning buggy firmware hacks.

 

[Svart]

1. Software costs money too.
2. High end software runs on high end hardware which also costs money.

Features (whether hard or soft) cost money.
Ergonomics and functionality cost money.
If that is not important to you then good for you.
To some it is.

Developing software costs money, yes. However, it doesn't cost nearly as much as developing new hardware, especially things like designing CMOS sensors and ICs. Software is cheaper by a long run in this case.

High end software does indeed need high-end hardware too.

However, to non-engineers, the relationship between the minimum necessary hardware specifications and the actual design specifications is rarely clear. Most designers purposely build in a lot of hardware headroom to allow the design to be leveraged on future products and possibly give software engineers more leeway when writing code. This is also influenced by the availability of the parts you wish to use and cost. The rule of thumb is to figure out what kind of resources load you will have and then pick the next class of processor up from there and/or just get the most powerful processor within your budget. Both are fairly accepted standards in the design world.

A theoretical case in point: A CPU that you use to 90% capacity might cost 10$. In 18 months(moore's law) you might have a CPU with 10X the processing power for 5$. You could keep using the older CPU because it works for you, or you could upgrade to the new CPU, save money and now have 10X the power to do more things now and have more room to grow in the future.

I think this is sort of what we have in the GH2 VS. AF100. Since Panny fabricates and uses their own processors and we know that the GH2 uses a top-of-the-line processor in it's family, it's fairly safe to assume that the AF100 would also use the top-of-the-line processor too. I could be wrong here but panny RARELY uses 3rd party ICs in their gear anymore it seems. Since each processor family is of a similar design, then their firmware will be of similar design and thus any portions could theoretically be ported from one product to another pretty easily. If you structure your code well, with lots of hooks so that other engineers can call routines easily, then you could also easily add features without needing to re-write any of the previous code at all (unless you find bugs which you will always do).

So we know we have a good processor in the GH2, now the question is, how much of it's power is utilized? If it has a lot of unused resources then we know that it would be totally capable of running all those other software tasks that the AF100 has. it could also be totally bogged down and the AF100 is completely different. Right now, we don't know.

I think maybe once VK gets into the gh2 a little more, we'll know a lot more.

As for ergonomics.. Have you seen the AF100? it's a square box with a handle. Hardly ergonomic.

 

[Gweilo66]

"As for ergonomics.. Have you seen the AF100? it's a square box with a handle. Hardly ergonomic."

Well..I thought I might be the only one who thought that. Just a little less so than EX1. But I'll still take one or two of either

 

[deltoidjohn]

I think I'll throw out a few points which haven't really been mentioned yet in this thread.

1. Everyone here keeps talking about the AF100 being overpriced because it shares hardware/firmware with a $900 camera. Is it not feasible to also deduce that the GH2 is miraculously underpriced, as it shares hardware/firmware with a $5000 camera?

2. Panasonic is a business. Their goal, like every other business, is to make money. They will make products with a feature set and sell them at whatever price they believe will give the best profit. And if you look at the sales for the GH2 and AF100, then it's obviously working. Whether hardware/software/R & D/parts are shared or not, or whether or not they have crippled the cameras or not, is irrelevant. The fact is they have delivered two very successful products.

3. People keep comparing the price/features of the GH2 to the AF100. What people should be doing is comparing the features of each camera to cameras in a similar price range, as this will give you an idea of just how good each product is when taken for it's individual face value. For example, compare the GH2 to camcorders in the $900 price range - granted, the GH2 does not have a 10x zoom lens. But those comparably priced camcorders do not have full manual control, selectable frame rates, interchangeable lenses, a gigantic sensor (from a traditional video viewpoint), etc. Sometimes they don't even have an EVF, or a mic input, or 24mbps recording, or a shoe mount, etc. And they definitely can't take 16mp stills that are almost on par with a DSLR. And now let's compare the GH2's price to similarly spec'd hybrid cameras - oh wait, there aren't any! Same goes for the AF100 - compare it to traditional camcorders in the $5000 price bracket and you'll find the features/price ratio appropriate. Compare it to similar products (ie professional digital cinema cameras such as RED, F3, Alexa etc) and you'll notice it is much cheaper, albeit at the sacrifice of some features.

 

[rigs]

The GH2 is what Panny made it to be. Sure it has its defientcies but what product doesn't. Each can make their own personal improvements to it with accessories and perhaps an upcomming firmware hack. Its a $900.00 camera that does very well for the price. To compare it to an AF100 or any other sub $5000.00 is completelly wrong. In the end its what you do with what you have that really matters.

 

[Barry_Green]

1. Everyone here keeps talking about the AF100 being overpriced because it shares hardware/firmware with a $900 camera.

What hardware is shared? What firmware?

The only thing that we know that is shared between them is the lens mount. Anything else is sheer speculation. They don't use the same sensor, they don't have the same performance, they don't have the same skew, they don't have the same menu options, they don't have the same codec, they don't have the same feature sets, and they don't have the same price tag, and they're not aimed at the same market. Why are they even compared at all?

Oh, I know why -- so that a few bitter people can complain about how "crippled" one of them is, and so they can call other people "stupid" for buying the more expensive product.

Well, you know what? That type of behavior isn't welcome here. This isn't a place for people to lecture others as to how stupid their choices are, or how stupid a company is, or to make ungrounded guesses into unchallengeable proclamations of truth.

This is a place for USERS of the products to gain and share information on how they work and to enable people to get the best from their chosen products. This is a place for video shooters and filmmakers to grow their craft, learn and grow their business, and achieve their goals through shared support and information exchange.

This is not a place for people to ***** and complain about manufacturers and how they're "the stupidest company they've ever seen" and that they're "crippling" their products. Who does that help? Who does that serve?

NOBODY.

So -- tell you what. Let's have a truce. Everyone whose goal is to complain, and who is setting out to try to tell other people that they're stupid, and whose mission is to convince other people about how "crippled" a certain product is -- can go away to their own forum and say that stuff all the time.

But over here -- no. We don't need that, and we don't want that. We don't foster negativity and complaining over here. We foster solutions and information and empowerment over here.

You want to help other people reach their goals? Welcome.
You want to achieve more in your art and in your business? Welcome.
You've achieved something great and you want to share that information? Welcome.

You want to complain about products and gripe about marketing and yell about "stupidity" and make accusations and all that stuff? Not welcome. Go away. Go somewhere else. This is not the place for that kind of behavior.

Look, we know we'll lose some membership over such a policy. We're fine with that. We don't begrudge you your opportunity to go complain to your heart's content. Just don't clutter up our forum with it, capische?

This is a place for users to help other users, for sharing of information and techniques and business insights, for sharing of art and discussing story and structure and the like, and for helping those artists make decisions about which gear will allow them to reach their goals.

We are about "doing", not about "complaining".

Here's the thing -- let's say that the GH2 actually was legitimately "crippled". So? What can you do about it? NOTHING. You can't change it, you can't DEMAND that they do something different, all you can do is -- BUY SOMETHING ELSE AND GET ON WITH YOUR LIFE. And go DO something with that other product. Make something. Create something -- other than complaints, that is.

The GH2 is what it is. And it isn't what it isn't. A list of "deficiencies" is only valid insofar as it helps a prospective purchaser decide whether that product does what they need, or not. And we, as a forum, are about the user, not about the equipment.

This conversation is over. And those who are enraged by the idea that we're more interested in helping people achieve their goals and inform them about their choices, than we are in hearing about their complaints and conspiracy theories -- please feel free to go through the door with the "EXIT" sign on it. Those who are interested in actually getting on with the business of making films and videos and the like, welcome, and hopefully you'll find a more supportive atmosphere and a little more elbow room here.

 

[Barry_Green]

The GH2 is what Panny made it to be. Sure it has its defientcies but what product doesn't. Each can make their own personal improvements to it with accessories and perhaps an upcomming firmware hack. Its a $900.00 camera that does very well for the price. To compare it to an AF100 or any other sub $5000.00 is completelly wrong. In the end its what you do with what you have that really matters.

Exactly.