GH2 official discussion thread

For those saying that getting 25p out of 50i isn't really a problem, here's a visual example...

100% crop

progressivevinterlaced.jpg


The top image is the maximum raw potential that progressive has, and the bottom is the maximum raw potential that interlaced has. :( So, as you can see, deinterlacing is easy enough but you loose one heck of a lot of resolution.

There are FAR better deinterlacing algorithms than line duping, but this is just an example. Why oh why couldn't Pan give PAL users a 25p option? :(
 
I realize manufacturers and press releases are rarely accurate regarding exact frame rates ...

1. So, is it correct to assume the 60i is really 59.94i?

2. And, is 24p -- actually 24p (for "film-out") -- or is it actually 23.976p?



Finally, aside from the possibility of a hack that offers higher bitrate encoding -- I guess I'm hoping for the possibility that the HDMI output IS NOT degraded in some camera mode -- during recording or not.

Logic would suggest that if the HDMI is "intentionally" degraded during recording (which is still an assumption) -- than it is possibly also degraded to some degree during non-recording states. After all, wouldn't the assumption be that one is using an external recording device? So what's the point of only crippling the HDMI output during an in-camera recording state -- that is not being used anyway. Unless, of course, certain aspects of the camera do not fully function unless the camera is in an official "record mode".

On the other hand, if the (unconfirmed) degradation is a purely a function of limited processing power -- than there may be the possibility of using an external recording solution when the camera is not officially in "record mode" . Price aside, external solutions such as Nanoflash or Ki Pro Mini represent interesting adjuncts to a camera like this -- with the latter (Ki Pro Mini) -- effectively addressing audio issues as well.
 
Matthew P said:
For those saying that getting 25p out of 50i isn't really a problem, here's a visual example...

100% crop

progressivevinterlaced.jpg


The top image is the maximum raw potential that progressive has, and the bottom is the maximum raw potential that interlaced has. :( So, as you can see, deinterlacing is easy enough but you loose one heck of a lot of resolution.

There are FAR better deinterlacing algorithms than line duping, but this is just an example. Why oh why couldn't Pan give PAL users a 25p option? :(
Click to expand...

If real 25P isn't possible, won't it be better quality to stretch 24P out to 25P. I know it's a pain, but surely anything is better than deinterlacing unless absolutely necessary.
 
blafarm said:
Finally, aside from the possibility of a hack that offers higher bitrate encoding -- I guess I'm hoping for the possibility that the HDMI output IS NOT degraded in some camera mode -- during recording or not.

Logic would suggest that if the HDMI is "intentionally" degraded during recording (which is still an assumption) -- than it is possibly also degraded to some degree during non-recording states. After all, wouldn't the assumption be that one is using an external recording device?
Click to expand...


Here is detailed explanation

GH1 (and GH2 as I know) uses special sensor mode for liveview.
It already has degraded resolution (made to suit EVF or LCD).
So, you don't need to degrade it intentionally.
But during recording it is a whole different story.
Sensor now is in proper mode and you need to make something to degrade output.
T2i and 5Dm2 move to low res.
7D adds color borders.
NEX keeps dot.
GH2 skips frames.
Of course, it is not some random behaviour :-)
 
Last edited:
I'd personally rather skip frames. But either way it's a bit naughty. Why not just overlay shooting info, or guides. At least that would be useful....or maybe it does :-)
 
Picturequest said:
There are many cameras with digital zoom that do simulate a continuous zoom. So even if there is a quality loss at a non optimized zoom ratio, it should work. That's my hopes. If not why call it a zoom? Zoom implies varying levels of focal length. If it is just 2.6x,than that is no different than the different CROP options for still frames.
Click to expand...

Yeah but that would imply a digital zoom. I understand this to be different: going from a level that uses binning/skipping/ whatever to a simple crop at its longest end. The transition between the two routines is what interests me. If it's zoomed in to, say, an area that covers 2400x1350 pixels on the sensor, will the camera be powerful enough to scan that entire area then do a simple downscaling or will it still rely on binning/skipping?
 
Vitaliy Kiselev said:
Here is detailed explanation

GH1 (and GH2 as I know) uses special sensor mode for liveview.
It already has degraded resolution (made to suit EVF or LCD).
So, you don't need to degrade it intentionally.
But during recording it is a whole different story.
Sensor now is in proper mode and you need to make something to degrade output.
T2i and 5Dm2 move to low res.
7D adds color borders.
NEX keeps dot.
GH2 skips frames.
Of course, it is not some random behaviour :-)
Click to expand...


Thanks for that explanation. So, I guess for bitrate-obsessed users -- hoping for a possible hack might be the only reasonable option.

Any insight regarding 60i vs. 59.94i -- and 24p vs. 23.976?
 
Last edited:
guys, it contains 23,810 instead of 23.98
I've uploaded the file with him in the mounting station edius - there in the file properties is 23,810! QuickTime Video (avc1)
What do you say, if you know something about this format )))))))
 
A couple of questions for the GH crowd. Was considering a 60d, now will wait for sure. Thought I'd read that the Canons performed better in low light (less noise) compared to unhacked GH1's, which is important to me. Do people think the new sensor will improve low light performance significantly (assuming it needs improvement)? Also, does the GH screen and the ability to use the viewfinder in movie mode eliminate the need for a Zfinder or similar?
 
volga said:
guys, it contains 23,810 instead of 23.98
I've uploaded the file with him in the mounting station edius - there in the file properties is 23,810! QuickTime Video (avc1)
What do you say, if you know something about this format )))))))
Click to expand...

what file ? where can we download it ?
 
DrHST said:
A couple of questions for the GH crowd. Was considering a 60d, now will wait for sure. Thought I'd read that the Canons performed better in low light (less noise) compared to unhacked GH1's, which is important to me. Do people think the new sensor will improve low light performance significantly (assuming it needs improvement)? Also, does the GH screen and the ability to use the viewfinder in movie mode eliminate the need for a Zfinder or similar?
Click to expand...

Yes, GH2 has 1 stop more sensitivity.
 
Vitaliy Kiselev said:
Please, stop discussing this POS made by Andrew.
It has no relation to normal actual footage.
No one even knows if it is actually from GH2.
Click to expand...

I think volga refers to actual GH2 footage (which one ?), not the one posted by Andrew (which was recompressed as quicktime mpeg2 25p anyway, not avc 23.810).
 
I think panasonic has been monitoring a lot the the GH13 :-) deep focus foliage shot galore. Should answer a lot the quality of the AVC codec in the GH2 only thing missing is quick motion.
 
divide said:
what file ? where can we download it ?
Click to expand...

Danielvilliers said:
I think that iy is this video that was being discussed http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCxPFga8elk . I think it is the first Gh2 video to be seen online.
Click to expand...

divide said:
I think volga refers to actual GH2 footage (which one ?), not the one posted by Andrew (which was recompressed as quicktime mpeg2 25p anyway, not avc 23.810).
Click to expand...

Vitaliy Kiselev said:
Please, stop discussing this POS made by Andrew.
It has no relation to normal actual footage.
No one even knows if it is actually from GH2.
Click to expand...

AFAIK, there is no [publicly] available original GH2 output yet. UTube videos are not available for download (in reference to Bruce Dale's Summer Morning short). Andrew Reid's footage uploaded on Vimeo is based on transcoded XDCAM footage. Who knows why he did it that way -- let's not jump to conclusions and try to keep discussion informative and civil. It's hard to stay engaged when people get emotional and fussy about others or don't properly reference what they are talking about.

Thank you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top