GH2 official discussion thread

svecher said:
In my mind, chroma sub-sampling (4:2:2) is a form of compression. Additionally, the "sensor signal", what you get in a RAW file is 12-bit, so will [likely] get down-sampled to 8-bit.
Click to expand...
Technically speaking, this is sub-sampling rather than compression. As you pointed out, the image sensor's Bayer Filter outputs 12-bit RGBG data from a 12-16 Megapixel array. When this RAW data is converted into Y:C:C format in a 4:2:2 ratio, the chroma components are sampled at half the horizontal and vertical resolution as the luma. Both luma and chroma are sampled at 8 bits. This YCC data stream is fed directly into the HDMI cable and is not compressed by any codec. Since there are no standard formats for streaming RAW Bayer Filter output, it would not be possible to do so through HDMI or any other type of external connector.
 
Is the 14-42 Lens any good. I see a lot of reference to the 14-140 and fast auto focus etc. Is the 14-140 better in some way besides tele?
 
mickee13 said:
Is the 14-42 Lens any good. I see a lot of reference to the 14-140 and fast auto focus etc. Is the 14-140 better in some way besides tele?
Click to expand...

Check out these links for reviews of the 14-42:

http://www.seriouscompacts.com/f41/mirrorless-camera-standard-zoom-shootout-impressions-558/
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/PanasonicDMCG2/page13.asp

Personally, I would not buy this lens. I am very happy with the 14-140, but if I wanted a shorter zoom, I would get the older 14-45, which tests better and has a metal lens mount.
 
xenogears said:
If the GH2 can give clean HDMI out , then the Atomos Ninja will be a nice investment.
Click to expand...

The Atomos records in ProRes for Apple. Is there something like that that records in another format more for PCs?
I edit use Canopus Edius. Or can Edius read ProRes files? (My editing computer is broken right now so I can't look it up)
 
mickee13 said:
Is the 14-42 Lens any good. I see a lot of reference to the 14-140 and fast auto focus etc. Is the 14-140 better in some way besides tele?
Click to expand...

ooooopsy.... big mistake on my side, thought you ask for the 14 - 140..... and away with all of that...... ;-)
 
Last edited:
NPrincen said:
Check out these links for reviews of the 14-42:

http://www.seriouscompacts.com/f41/mirrorless-camera-standard-zoom-shootout-impressions-558/
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/PanasonicDMCG2/page13.asp

Personally, I would not buy this lens. I am very happy with the 14-140, but if I wanted a shorter zoom, I would get the older 14-45, which tests better and has a metal lens mount.
Click to expand...

I know a lot of people hate the new 14-42mm kit lens. Sure the 14-45mm is much sharper. However, that lens is $250 the 14-42mm is $100. There should be a big difference between a $100 and a $250 lens.

I am just glad we have the option to buy whichever one we want or to just get the camera as a body only package. I had the 14-45mm but ended up selling it. It is an amazingly sharp lens. However, you just couldn’t take a picture indoors with it on the GF1. The GF1 ISO range is just too limited to really take advantage of this lens.

The GH2 should remedy that.
 
I had the chance to shoot video with the Nikon D7000, Nikon D90, Hacked Panasonic GF1(AKA GF13), and a GH1 yesterday. I took some test shots that show the resolution differences between the cameras. I also have links to downloadable straight out of the camera samples in the description of the youtube video below.


1080p Youtube link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tovWSXvUj9s&fmt=37
 
mpgxsvcd said:
I know a lot of people hate the new 14-42mm kit lens. Sure the 14-45mm is much sharper. (..) I am just glad we have the option to buy whichever one we want or to just get the camera as a body only package.
Click to expand...

Thanks for posting this info about the 14-42, the DP review is really bad. But where do you have the option to get the body only? Amazon Europe only sells them with either the 14-42 or the 14-140. I pre-ordered the body with 14-42 because I already have the 14-140 and don't want another one. O well if this 14-42 is that cheap it's just a nice lens to have on the body by default and then not having to worry about it getting wet or scratched.
 
Last edited:
Its all about the relative performance and quality amongst the different state of the art. A D7000s performance does help us evaluate the GH-2s codec and image quality. So I appreciate the offering.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top