GH2 official discussion thread

mpgxsvcd said:
Wait a second. Are you saying we are idiots for not carrying around extra lighting?
Click to expand...

:-)
I think that you are little extreme here.
All I want to say is that if you are shooting at ISO 800 or more and could add extra lighting it is much better to add lighting.
Not because of ISO, but because of image quality.

Also until we get fast lenses from Panasonic ISO 800 will remain useless indoors unless we are carrying the lighting that you spoke of.
Click to expand...

And that fast lenses you want?
Panasonic GH2 will be able to use Olympus SWD zooms with F2.0 with AF.
Do you want F1.4?
Anyway, all of this lenses won't be cheap.
And all will have wired focus.
So, I do not share your wishes.
 
mpgxsvcd said:
Wait a second. Are you saying we are idiots for not carrying around extra lighting? With a camera that is designed to be as small as possible even at the expense of “some” image quality that just doesn’t seem practical.

Also until we get fast lenses from Panasonic ISO 800 will remain useless indoors unless we are carrying the lighting that you spoke of.
Click to expand...

"Idiot" might be a strong word, I'd prefer "unprepared". If you are a professional(making money doing this) then you should plan out your shots, plan your framing, plan your lighting, plan your sound, etc. If you show up to some event without a hint of a plan then you are going to have poor results unless you just get terribly lucky. Most likely you won't be lucky. Most likely your result will be on par with your preparation, which is poor.

IF you simply just can't shoot with some extra lighting(which is VERY rare in professional circumstances, most people are just too lazy to figure out a way) then you are using the wrong camera for the shoot simply because you KNOW that the GH1 has banding issues.

Either way, the person is not using the right tools for the job and it's nobody's fault but the person who didn't plan correctly for the situation.

You can get up-in-arms all you want and demand a camera that can shoot by starlight but it doesn't change the fact that ALL cameras love light. This whole super-low-light, high ISO, thing is only a gimmick really. Your 1600+ISOs are already outside the range of just about any practical motion picture film.
 
Svart said:
You can get up-in-arms all you want and demand a camera that can shoot by starlight but it doesn't change the fact that ALL cameras love light. This whole super-low-light, high ISO, thing is only a gimmick really. Your 1600+ISOs are already outside the range of just about any practical motion picture film.
Click to expand...

Absolutely correct.
It is not only our of range, it really means that light is with very high probability is unacceptable by its quality.
Right now we got DOF. Some got that good sound is important.
Next most will get that most movies require heavy extra lighting.
And this lighting is required not because camera can't shot in available light, but because you want specific lighting with appropriate quality.
 
high iso cant replace low iso + good lighting control. good lighting makes color pops and adds more depths. photo strobists use flashes all the time at iso 100 or 200. for video it seems more important. noiseless high iso is nice to have though. what i really want is not having the banding issue at all. i freaking hate the banding. i tried the sensor burn-out for 3 days which didnt work. for GH2, i dont think 14-140 will be usable indoor. prolly 2.8 zoom at high iso... with some lighting control. i'd prefer fast primes at lower iso WITHOUT having the ugly banding. i call the kit zoom a sunshine lens. i wont use it unless i see sun-rays.
 
Last edited:
Btw one important aspect of many modern zooms is their varifocal nature (they need refocusing after zooming).
From ultrazooms only Tokina AT-X 24-200mm is parafocal.
May be some older designs also.

And for indoors shooting it is better to have good zooms and primes combination. With mechanical focus rings, not wired.
 
I have several c-mount bolex lenses. Has anyone confirmed almost a month after the announcement, if the "digital zoom" feature is fixed at 2.6x, or can I crop 10 or 15%? I believe it was once called "Variable." I have a nice Arriflex 25mm 1.4 Arri S mount lens coming in with slight vignetting. If I could get rid of that this would be a highly useful lens.

Thanks
 
It is fixed. This is confirmed.
And it is not digital zoom (because camera has other digital zoom menu item with plain bad 2x and 4x settings).
 
being able to control the variable cropping ratio in real-time through touchscreen lcd would be super. but only wishful thinking?

edit: ok... so its fixed... darn.

what about noise level? does 2.6x or 3.9x 1:1 cropping increase noise level noticeably?
 
stonebat said:
i'd prefer fast primes at lower iso WITHOUT having the ugly banding..
Click to expand...

I currently am time-lapsing at night like mad for a project and I have banding sometimes even at ISO 160 and even with a 50mm Voigtländer Nokton f 1.1 when trying to balance between clipping of lights in the frame and underexposure of sky.

The banding is an interesting thing to say the least (It drives me insane, currently) and I wait for somebody to give me at least an explanation for it. Noise I wouldn't care much, but this ugly structures in the shadows just yesterday ruined another three hours shoot for me. For this alone I would buy the GH2 if it wouldn't have this issues...... if only... you know, I am the 25 p Wahabist radical from PAListan around here.... ;-)
 
Hey Vitaliy K (not the boxer), IF you somehow would manage to hack the GH2 do you think you would be able to add 50/60p @ 1080?
 
tipota said:
I currently am time-lapsing at night like mad for a project and I have banding sometimes even at ISO 160 and even with a 50mm Voigtländer Nokton f 1.1 when trying to balance between clipping of lights in the frame and underexposure of sky.

The banding is an interesting thing to say the least (It drives me insane, currently) and I wait for somebody to give me at least an explanation for it. Noise I wouldn't care much, but this ugly structures in the shadows just yesterday ruined another three hours shoot for me. For this alone I would buy the GH2 if it wouldn't have this issues...... if only... you know, I am the 25 p Wahabist radical from PAListan around here.... ;-)
Click to expand...
Some people got rid of the banding by using apps like Neat Video. Prolly... made-in-china issue?
 
Vitaliy Kiselev said:
Btw one important aspect of many modern zooms is their varifocal nature (they need refocusing after zooming).
From ultrazooms only Tokina AT-X 24-200mm is parafocal.
May be some older designs also.

And for indoors shooting it is better to have good zooms and primes combination. With mechanical focus rings, not wired.
Click to expand...

That is a good point. Does the 14-140mm need refocusing? I have the 45-200mm and I know it does. You cannot zoom in MF mode with it. You must be in AFC mode and then you have to zoom slowly. Is that the same for the 14-140mm?
 
I don't know how it works on the GH1/GH2, but I can tell you that on the AF100, the 14-140 keeps its focus distance throughout the zoom range. It's really impressive. I'll sell off my GH1 soon, but I'm keeping this lens.
 
As I said, parafocal is very hard to design.
Especially for ultrazooms.
But parafocal ultrazoom is very handy to use.
Zoom in, focus, zoom out and you have perfect focus :-)
 
Barry_Green said:
I don't know how it works on the GH1/GH2, but I can tell you that on the AF100, the 14-140 keeps its focus distance throughout the zoom range.
Click to expand...

This is very interesting.
And if you close contacts and use it as dumb lens it still preserves focus?
Because any varifocal lens could be made parafocal with smart focus adjustment during zooming :-)
 
Let's not underestimate the kit lens. It has stepless aperture and the fastest autofocus in m43. I'm not surprised that AF100 can do that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top