GH2 official discussion thread

Hmmmm,
I just watched this clip
http://vimeo.com/17383713
PW: lumix

Download the MTS File, please.

I have to admit, I don´t like the noise at all!

Look at 00:38 (rooftop)
or
1:07 (House)

Theres an awful amount of noise (even colored) present. Looks terrible!
 
FelixGER said:
Hmmmm,
I just watched this clip
http://vimeo.com/17383713
PW: lumix

Download the MTS File, please.

I have to admit, I don´t like the noise at all!

Look at 00:38 (rooftop)
or
1:07 (House)

Theres an awful amount of noise (even colored) present. Looks terrible!
Click to expand...

I think his ISO might have been higher than what you would expect in daylight. He was shooting at 1/800, f5.6.
Also, on cmos cameras it is normal for all isos, even the highest, to have a bit of noise contamination.
Cmos sensors will have this touch of visible noise until the noise floor starts to really ramp up and affect more of the image, which on the gh2 is at 3200.
Hunter has noted that the noise reduction on gh2 is quite good, and would address that before compression. (he wasn't using it on the shot)
 
The Canon DSLRs do something like that, too -> Blacks ok, Bright stuff ok, but dark areas show substantially more noise. It´s just alot worse on this GH2 shot than on my 60D.
BTW, my Sony NX5 (prosumer camcorder with AVCHD Codec) doesn´t have this problem at all. The noise is similar from 0 to 255, just a fine grain, but thats a 4500 € camera. Maybe I´m expecting to much of the GH2...
 
First words under the clip, dont ever shoot like this:Drogar-Mad(DBG): be reasonable this was a test, do it with your cams and lets analyse!
 
FelixGER said:
The Canon DSLRs do something like that, too -> Blacks ok, Bright stuff ok, but dark areas show substantially more noise. It´s just alot worse on this GH2 shot than on my 60D.
BTW, my Sony NX5 (prosumer camcorder with AVCHD Codec) doesn´t have this problem at all. The noise is similar from 0 to 255, just a fine grain, but thats a 4500 € camera. Maybe I´m expecting to much of the GH2...
Click to expand...

To be sure, the color science on that cam has the noise reduction built in. The cmos sensors always have this touch of noise (note- the signal to noise ratio), and improvements in intelligent color science can really do amazing things with it.
DPs will intentionally rate a format lower than official spec, just to get the cleanest image imaginable. For example, one can shoot 800 pretty well on the dslrs, but the clean, subtle and accurate dynamic range at 160 really comes across as first class.
 
FelixGER said:
Hmmmm,
I have to admit, I don´t like the noise at all!
Theres an awful amount of noise (even colored) present. Looks terrible!
Click to expand...

Come on- After seeing the astonishing videos that have come from the GH2 as well reports from credible people.
It's been well established that it's remarkable how the GH2 is performing. So if you see a bad video, you can easily
deduce that it has zero to do with the GH2, and is either user error or how that person intentionally shot it.

Pappas
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms
http://www.PappasArts.com
 
Another grade session to share! It does seem that smooth, -2 on contrast, saturation and sharpness, is a good way to go on the gh2.
The smooth sample on the Japanese site:
leaves2.jpg

leaves1.jpg

window1.jpg

window3.jpg
 
"Compared to the hacked GH1, 44Mbit is no match for 24mbit on a proper AVCHD encoder. The hacked GH1 looks pale and low contrast in comparison, it doesn't handle wide highly detailed shots as well, nor does it live up to claims of being better than the GH2 on fast motion / whip pans. It's also less saturated, especially at ISO 1600 and it has more banding. Some more so than others.

I have not noticed a single hint of mud on the GH2 since I got it and all the nit pickers uploading still shots from the GH2 with big arrows pointing at mud have not helped me notice it either. If it is there, then it's something only idiots notice!

The GH2 *is* better than the hacked GH1 in every way. Period."
Click to expand...

-From the gh2 review on that site, eoshd.com, that people here seem to hate for some reason (I'm new to the politics of it). Comments?
(I just edited this to make it clear that I'm quoting someone else)
 
Last edited:
psoetio said:
"Compared to the hacked GH1, 44Mbit is no match for 24mbit on a proper AVCHD encoder. The hacked GH1 looks pale and low contrast in comparison, it doesn't handle wide highly detailed shots as well, nor does it live up to claims of being better than the GH2 on fast motion / whip pans. It's also less saturated, especially at ISO 1600 and it has more banding. Some more so than others.

I have not noticed a single hint of mud on the GH2 since I got it and all the nit pickers uploading still shots from the GH2 with big arrows pointing at mud have not helped me notice it either. If it is there, then it's something only idiots notice!

The GH2 *is* better than the hacked GH1 in every way. Period."

-From the gh2 review on that site, eoshd.com, that people here seem to hate for some reason (I'm new to the politics of it). Comments?
Click to expand...
Though you have some good points you are not helping your case by calling folks idiots. If you had just left that out I would have had more respect for your post. jm2c
 
I wasn't calling people idiots. I was quoting from the review, and those were his words... I wonder why people get so passionate about this stuff?
 
Ok my bad. But it just looks like one big paragraph to me and not a quote.

Why do people get so passionate....?? I have no idea. As entertaining as it can be at times...it gets old quickly.
 
psoetio said:
"If it is there, then it's something only idiots notice!

The GH2 *is* better than the hacked GH1 in every way. Period."
Click to expand...

I totally agree with you. Except for the name calling- simply no need to yank it into the negative zone. Just try to educate those with facts- you'll usually when with better results...

Yes the GH2 ROCKS!

EDIT: Oops..Just like IAN-T it looked like one big blob of text. Thought you said it. Nevertheless the point is valid overall, just not here of course.



Pappas
http://www.pbase.com/arrfilms
http://myspace.com/pappasarts
http://www.facebook.com/pappasarts
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top