GH2 GH2 + Olympus 12mm or Panasonic TM900 for video?

S

svem

Active member
I am looking to get a better solution for shooting video which minimizes auto focusing as an issue. The Olympus 12mm f2.0 from what I have read seems to have the best auto focus with the GH2. However, it also costs $700

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/805167-REG/Olympus_V311020SU000_M_Zuiko_Digital_ED.html

The Panasonic TM900 camcoder meanwhile has come down in price to $600.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...DC_TM900K_HDC_TM900_High_Definition_3MOS.html

So I was wondering which would be a better solution for video purposes where I am looking to use the camera on a steadycam, camera crane, slider when focusing can become an issue?

Which would yield better quality: a GH2(hacked or unhacked) with Olympus 12mm lens or Panasonic TM900(or another comparable camcorder)? How would the auto focus compare between the two? And which would give the better low light performance? (I have the GH2 body already so I am deciding between the Olympus 12mm and a camcorder like the TM900)
 
Last edited:
I'd personally go with the TM900, simply because of more reliable focusing during video, and that I wouldn't have to worry about much when it's on a steadicam, crane etc. Also you'd be able to zoom without having to re-balance the steadicam.
 
The TM900 is on sale right now because it's replacement ( X900M ) is almost here, so don't count on the price remaining low forever.

For the work you describe the TM900 with it's 1/4 inch sensors would have much deeper depth and faster focusing than any large sensor camera would. About the only place where the GH-2 would have an advantage is low-light, where the focusing would be dirt slow but the large sensor image would be cleaner than the TM900's little 1/4 inch sensors.

Another thing to keep in mind is that it's much quicker to switch rigs with separate cameras, than have to re-rig one camera for a new set-up. ( i.e. You pick up the steadicam with TM900 to start shooting, then switch back to your GH-2 rig to continue shooting non-stedicam shots )

Obviously you will have to do a little work in post to get these two cameras to match color-wise, but that should not be a big deal.

Lastly, remember to buy a high-capacity battery for the TM900 if you go this route. The largest battery for the TM900 is good for almost 4 hours of shooting.
 
I've used the TM700 a lot, which was the predecessor to the TM900. If the low light ability hasen't been improved, then the GH2 will absolutely trounce it in that regard.
 
I use both the TM700 and GH2 because the TM700 has 1080p60 with great fast zoom and good OIS and the GH2 is great in low light with fast primes like the 25mm F0.95 Nokton.
 
I have a TM700 and fly it on a stabilizer quite a bit when I want auto focus. It works really well. The only issue is when conforming 60p to 24p, the off subject background is super sharp and strobes. You really need to use a slow shutter speed so that it looks good when conformed. Another issue is that it is such a light cam that it could use extra weight on both the top and bottom of the stabilzer to make it easy to use.

Cheers,
Pete
 
Not to be a stickler but why do you need autofocus? As for flying on a steadicam the new hyperprime 12mm 1.6 is PERFECT for steadicam work cause after about 4 feet it's all in focus... Simply the best!
 
DBP said:
The codec is much better in 60p mode. It's 28mbps AVCHD. 24p is either 13 or 17mbps I believe.
Click to expand...

I think it is 17 Mbps, but when you consider that this data rate is being used for only 24 frames per second ( 740 Kbits per frame ) versus 28 Mbps used for 60 frames per second ( 489 Kbits per frame ) I am not sure the result is better when you are conforming the 60p down to a 24p frame rate. ( 60p looks great as 60p, and is good when conformed to 24p for slow motion playback )
 
TheDingo said:
I think it is 17 Mbps, but when you consider that this data rate is being used for only 24 frames per second ( 740 Kbits per frame ) versus 28 Mbps used for 60 frames per second ( 489 Kbits per frame ) I am not sure the result is better when you are conforming the 60p down to a 24p frame rate. ( 60p looks great as 60p, and is good when conformed to 24p for slow motion playback )
Click to expand...

You seem to be assuming that the codec in question is not an inter-frame codec. I don't know if any (doesn't mean there aren't any) consumer cam codecs that compress each frame individually. All I'm familiar with use a long GOP inter-frame codecs like AVCHD. And in that case, the actual bit rate used depends on the differences frame-to-frame. Said another way, more motion means more bit rate. Turns out, these codecs aren't very sensitive to the FPS (frames per second) being used -- a higher frame rate doesn't necessarily translate into a higher bit rate. In fact, it usually does not. That's why the old standard AVCHD v1 had a top frame rate of 30p with a max bit rate of 24Mpbs, while in AVCHD v2 your top frame rate doubles to 60p, but the max frame rate only increases to 28Mpbs.
 
I was assuming that the subject and or camera wasn't static. Motion decreases the efficiency of Long GOP compression.
 
TheDingo said:
I think it is 17 Mbps, but when you consider that this data rate is being used for only 24 frames per second ( 740 Kbits per frame ) versus 28 Mbps used for 60 frames per second ( 489 Kbits per frame ) I am not sure the result is better when you are conforming the 60p down to a 24p frame rate. ( 60p looks great as 60p, and is good when conformed to 24p for slow motion playback )
Click to expand...

It's true that 60p has more frames, but there's also a lot less change from frame to frame, compared to 24p. So 60p doesn't need 2.5x more data rate to have equivalent quality to 24p. At least that's my understanding. Also, I think the TM700s 17mbs codec might not have B frames like the 28mbps one does, which makes the quality suffer even further. Someone like Barry Green could probably answer that better though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top