GH2 official discussion thread

I dont think I would call 14-140 an investment...If you need one buy one ...if you dont..dont....there certainly will be a lot of cheap 14-45's though cause you cannot get body only here . and you are only paying $100 difference for it .only in.ssooooo i think we will be using them a paper weights,door stops,and in binocular version as zoomable reading glasses ...
Larry
 
larryfine451 said:
there certainly will be a lot of cheap 14-45's though cause you cannot get body only here . and you are only paying $100 difference for it .
Larry
Click to expand...


14-45 or do you mean the 14-42?
Because according to Panasonic you can get body only, with the 14-42 Kit or with the 14-140 Kit lens.
 
Hi everyone, I have a simple question to ask.

Currently I'm using the OM E3 still camera and I believe it is now the time for me to start learning videography. Right now I'm seriously considering the GH2, because I can still use my ZD glasses with an adapter and have some form of auto focus. (I heard that every "pro" uses manual focus for video, but I am not quite sure) And the price/perfromance for GH2 is attractive to me.

I have followed some discussion thread about the GH13 and have the impression that the hack would improve video quality in lowlight situation (correct me if I'm wrong). But I still hope my machine can produce some good quality still image. I may lose some detail due to the stronger AA filter on GH2 (again, correct me if I'm wrong), but you can't get all the good things in life can you? However, there hasn't been much discussion on how the hack would affect the performance on still image of the GH series (maybe due to the fact that this is a video forum). I would appreciate any input on this area.

Many thanks
 
shutterwill said:
there hasn't been much discussion on how the hack would affect the performance on still image of the GH series (maybe due to the fact that this is a video forum). I would appreciate any input on this area.
Click to expand...

The hack only addresses the video codecs. It doesn't have any affect on still images. Also keep in mind that it's not clear whether the GH2 can be hacked or will need to be hacked.

And be careful about assuming 4/3 lenses will autofocus on the GH2. Many of them won't on the GH1.
 
shutterwill said:
Currently I'm using the OM E3 still camera and I believe it is now the time for me to start learning videography. Right now I'm seriously considering the GH2, because I can still use my ZD glasses with an adapter and have some form of auto focus. (I heard that every "pro" uses manual focus for video, but I am not quite sure) And the price/perfromance for GH2 is attractive to me.
Click to expand...

mountainradio said:
And be careful about assuming 4/3 lenses will autofocus on the GH2. Many of them won't on the GH1.
Click to expand...
Assumption is based on new compatibility listed released for G2/G10. Unlike Gx1s, these two, and presumably the soon to be released GH2 support AFS autofocus on almost every FT lens under the sun.

An yes, at this point the hack is video-centric because that's the area where GH1 is seriously lacking for certain types of shots. There is nothing in the hack that improves low-light performance, however increased bitrates in AVCHD mode help with maintaining very good image quality in high detail, deep DOF-type scenes. Also, some people (myself included) shoot in native 24p mode (just keep the scene moving as static scenes are death).

If low-light performance is important and you intend to shoot 1080 at 24fps (the Cinematic Mode) it seems at this point that GH2 will hold a theoretical edge. Low-level analysis of 720 50/60p footage from GH2 prototypes seems to suggest its implementation did not change from GH1. Unless that changes for production model without benefit of B-frames and due to low bitrates (17Mbps) GH13 will win in this mode. There is no 50/60p at 1080 on GH2, same as GH1.
 
larryfine451 said:
I dont think I would call 14-140 an investment...If you need one buy one ...if you dont..dont....there certainly will be a lot of cheap 14-45's though cause you cannot get body only here . and you are only paying $100 difference for it .only in.ssooooo i think we will be using them a paper weights,door stops,and in binocular version as zoomable reading glasses ...
Larry
Click to expand...

The 14-42 lenses that are being sold with the GH2 are extremely valuable, and should be considered collector's intems. Some think they are worth their weight in gold. If you see any on ebay the day after the GH2 is released, it is imperative that we should all bid as high as we can. Owning one of these will be a treasure that lasts a lifetime.
(did I lay it on too thick?)
 
AKED said:
here is some more footage, video different modes and solutions from Poland

http://optyczne.pl/3388-nowo%C5%9B%C4%87-Panasonic_Lumix_DMC-GH2_-_zdj%C4%99cia_i_filmy_przyk%C5%82adowe.html
Click to expand...
Thanks for that link, AKED. First samples of 24P footage!
00002 GH2 AVCHD 24P Cinema mode.jpg

It appears that optyczne testers were quite aware of GH1's woes and did a fast pan on death foliage with high shutter speed. Yeah, beauty comes mainly from what's not there -- namely any significant amount of mud. Avd. clip bitrate is ~22Mbps, with max 28Mbps. Not too bad, as we have B-frames. And did I mention the "proper" framerate of 23.976 instead of GH1's 23.971 (in native mode)? Boy, this would be sweet when hacked to ~50 Mbps ... :)

[EDIT]
BTW, clip titled "AVCHD Movie Mode Manual mode, 8 sec., 1080i, 15 MB" is a good example why interlacing is a very bad idea. Medium to fast motion in the scene makes footage fall completely apart. Even 24p (normally fast pans are a big no-no in "cinematography") looks much better in comparison.
 
Last edited:
Adventsam said:
Not very impressive though, seems these guys dont know how to use ISO or shutter and just let the camera do its own thing. Flicker seems bad on some clips? 24mbs at other than 1/50 shutter in europe will be bad-problem
Click to expand...
I think they did it on purpose to test for codec problems, not for aesthetics. Waiting for P.Bloom to get some "aesthetic" footage out :)
 
Last edited:
How does 24p look rendered to 25p? what happens to the sound?

How does 24p look rendered to 25p? what happens to the sound?

Any idea, have you tested it?
 
I have posted the release version of StreamParser 2.0. The main addition is support for other cameras. When an unknown camera is detected the video frames will show as gray bars. In the configuration>camera menu item it shows which camera type was detected. I have put every model I've had access to in there. If you have another Panasonic camera model that looks like it was correctly detected please let me know so I can add that model to the menu line.

Also, if there is a Panasonic AVCHD camera that was not detected let me know (and supply a very short clip from it, if you can).

You can get it here: http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...ta-Available&p=2113515&viewfull=1#post2113515.

Chris
 
That 24p footage looks damn good. Maybe I'm not looking hard enough, but I don't really see moire or aliasing or mud. Awesome.
 
AKED said:
14-45 or do you mean the 14-42?
Because according to Panasonic you can get body only, with the 14-42 Kit or with the 14-140 Kit lens.
Click to expand...

Yep 14-42 I was even thinking that while I was typing but was in a hurry ...knew if was wrong someone would pipe -up with the correct answer.

cheers
 
That 24p looks fantastic! Very sharp indeed.

In regards to the 80% mode... It would be basically like shooting 30p at 30Mbps, wouldn't it? No sound of course, but that might not be a problem if you use an external recorder.

The 50i looks preeeeetty bad though, compression wise (no mud though... just lots of artifacts). But I can see what Panasonic were thinking... they were trying to satisfy both the film making camp, and the consumer camp. The filmies get true 24p which appears to be very nicely encoded, and the consumers get nice smooth 50i/60i with a smaller filesize to boot. 50p/60p would have been a waste of their money to implement, as consumers probably don't want such big files that are hard to handle, and the only interest from the filmies seems to be to use it to get 1080p slow-motion. Until there are more 50p/60p distribution options (YouTube would be a big driver for this), we probably won't see it on much consumer tech. We're getting there though, and the world will FINALLY be rid of interlaced footage! Hurrah!

Also, the 720p50 option looks SO detailed, that it's not such a bad thing not to have 1080p50 imo. Plus 720p is actually a format that can be distributed. The one downside is that it's 17Mbps... would have been very nice to have it at 24Mbps, seeing as that's in the ACVHD spec.

So, overall I think Panasonic have actually done quite well. The lack of 25p is a big shame, but they'd have to break out of the simplicity that they've built up to implement it, and would probably get too many calls from confused consumers who don't want to look at the manual, lol. :)
 
Matthew P said:
Also, the 720p50 option looks SO detailed, that it's not such a bad thing not to have 1080p50 imo. Plus 720p is actually a format that can be distributed. The one downside is that it's 17Mbps... would have been very nice to have it at 24Mbps, seeing as that's in the ACVHD spec.
Click to expand...
Generally yes but: If the 720p footage looks really great and really detailed, I do not care if this is achieved with 17 mbps or with 24 mbps.
As long as the footage is good.
 
Matthew P said:
The lack of 25p is a big shame, but they'd have to break out of the simplicity that they've built up to implement it, and would probably get too many calls from confused consumers who don't want to look at the manual, lol. :)
Click to expand...

Would it be really that hard to implement the possibility to switch from 24 p to 25 p?

Because for us Aborigines of PAListan still this questions are standing:

What happens if we need to mix 24 p material with 25 p material we shoot with another camera in a project?

Why now all of a sudden will we need to make a pull down removal which we did not need before?

Why do we may have to apply pitch shift to the audio because we have a -4% change of sound - an half tone which can be hell if we shoot music for instance?

Why do we have the distinctive possibility of flickering or pumping when we shoot in certain lighting conditions?

And do we like it that our film may run 4% faster if shown in a 25 p environment (practically all European TV)?

One little option in the sub-menu - and a lot of us will buy the camera immediately.
 
I think one of the reasons for 1080/50i might be, that the HDTV standard is either 720/50p (60p) or 1080/50i (60i),
No 25p there.
So for the ordinary user, who films and plays back on the TV screen, the 50i will be easy because this is the T V standard. And they get smooth motions, what they are used from their video cameras and din not get on the GH1.

25p is not for the consumer but more for the professional user and I think, the main target of customers is the consumer, not the professionals.

Anyway, let us hope, that either Panasonic is reading and listening here to the wishes of us and adds this feature to the GH2 via firmware, or that Vitaliy finds a way to enhance the GH2 to a GH2-13. or GH2V(italiy)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top