GH2 official discussion thread

If you take a closer look at the bitrate you´ll notice that the first shot is 1.7 MB/s, the second one is 2 MB/s and the last is 1.6 MB/s. A closer comparison between 1080i60 and 720p60 will possibly follow if Richard can take the time...
 
roei z said:
wierd.. so this clip:
http://vimeo.com/16497211
(which i downloaded somewhere as MTS)

is true 24p from the GH2. no?
Click to expand...
The original on this clip is not an MTS file. It was obviously exported from an editing suite. This should be quite obvious, even without looking at file extensions and analysis program output, as no camera (to my knowledge) does in-camera titles or cuts or soundtrack mixing.
 
svecher said:
The original on this clip is not an MTS file. It was obviously exported from an editing suite. This should be quite obvious, even without looking at file extensions and analysis program output, as no camera (to my knowledge) does in-camera titles or cuts or soundtrack mixing.
Click to expand...

Ok, Ok, rub it in... i'm an Idiot. :)
only saw MTS and thought it's the original.
 
Last edited:
Vitaliy Kiselev said:
The more I think and talk to people the more I understand that we don't have 1080p60/p50 not because purely technical reasons, but because monkey learned the lesson.
They released 17Mbps codec with mud in GH1, etc. And now they are bound at 21.4Mbps(video rate only), most probably without B frames (due to encoder restrictions, so it is almost the same GH1 encoder), and at 1080p60.
This won't look good. Even with B frames you need 28Mbps and full fledged encoder (ala TM700) to make it look good.
At 1080i it'll look better.
And at 1080p30/p25 it could start to look worse again due to more hard work of motion prediction.
This could be real reasons behind modes that we see now.
Click to expand...
To me, the fact that GH1's hardware is capable of sustaining bitrates 3-4 times the cap has settled the question of "technical reasons" a while ago. IMHO, GH1 as a video product was released with encoder specifications it had to compete with rival DSLRs and not with own "relatives" in pro and consumer divisions. GH2 is an heir to that concept. None of GH2's direct competitors offer 1080 50/60p recording mode. And so GH2 does not have to. Those in need of such capabilities should be looking either upwards (AF100) or sideways (TM700 or 750, depending how hot one runs with 3D fever).

My guess is it will also be revealed that the answer to everyone's encoder woes (clean HDMI out) will also be "capped" in this particular regard. The message to me is clear: if you want to capture "FullHD footage" you have to step up in your expectations and budget.

In my mind the monkey hasn't learned any new lessons (where art thou o GH2?) and keeps playing the same old tune it has all along. And hopes that, as our Portuguese friend here recently noted, that the pesky pest of a hack project simply vanishes into obscurity. Hopefully, there is part II to this story ...
 
I am not very knowledgeable with the technical stuff, I currently have the hacked GH1. I mainly shoot quick action sports, should I keep the GH1 or get the GH2? I guess at 720p I will have a much higher bitrate with the GH1 but would have better low light capability along with being able to crank up the ISO.
 
svecher said:
To me, the fact that GH1's hardware is capable of sustaining bitrates 3-4 times the cap has settled the question of "technical reasons" a while ago. IMHO, GH1 as a video product was released with encoder specifications it had to compete with rival DSLRs and not with own "relatives" in pro and consumer divisions. GH2 is an heir to that concept. None of GH2's direct competitors offer 1080 50/60p recording mode. And so GH2 does not have to. Those in need of such capabilities should be looking either upwards (AF100) or sideways (TM700 or 750, depending how hot one runs with 3D fever).

My guess is it will also be revealed that the answer to everyone's encoder woes (clean HDMI out) will also be "capped" in this particular regard. The message to me is clear: if you want to capture "FullHD footage" you have to step up in your expectations and budget.

In my mind the monkey hasn't learned any new lessons (where art thou o GH2?) and keeps playing the same old tune it has all along. And hopes that, as our Portuguese friend here recently noted, that the pesky pest of a hack project simply vanishes into obscurity. Hopefully, there is part II to this story ...
Click to expand...
You sound like vDSLR's codec is gonna suck... and I concur with you. At least GH2 seems outputting 1024p via HDMI. Neither 550D nor 60D does that. Also GH2 is better photo camera than GH1. Hopefully we get something like Ninja that records other than prores format. My money is still on GH series.
 
Uwe Lansing said:
24p, iso 3200 - that looks really good: http://www.vimeo.com/16817446
Click to expand...

For 3200 ISO that's pretty damn good. It's still very sharp/detailed too! 3200 in film would be riddled with grain. Now if you take that HDMI out to a Nano at 80mbs long gop or higher, this will hold really well since the codec wont' be stressed by all the noise like the 24mbs codec can be. Can't wait to see the GH2 recorded to an outboard codec via the HDMI.

Pappas
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms
http://www.PappasArts.com
 
got the GH2 from Japan..
took me half a day to get it working cause of the damn menus..
if you need some tests i'll do my best.
meanwhile I took some short footage of my face on 200 iso 1/60 24p -
i have to say i am not impressed (unless i'm doing something wrong).
the dark area's look very badly compressed at the moment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top