GH2 second thought (coming back to my aps-c)

TheDingo said:
7D Cons
- Cannot use as many lenses as the GH2 because of the deep flange distance ( $2,600 to Modify your 7D body to take PL lenses )
- High degree of aliasing with fine details
- High degree of moire with fine patterns ( especially with wide shots )

Canon already sells a camera with the sharpness of the GH2, it's called a C300 and costs $16,000
Click to expand...

I really don't get why you guys have this Napoleon complex about this thing (except that the Canon line obliterates the GH2 in sales). Aesthetics of an image are subjective, not everybody thinks Camera A looks "better" than Camera B, not everybody thinks Camera B looks "better" than Camera A (not pixel peeping, but overall, all the aspects of the image, looked at holistically). I think the footage from the GH2 looks like crap. You guys think the footage from Canons looks like crap. That's fine, thankfully they make both cameras.
 
gonzo_entertainment said:
I think the footage from the GH2 looks like crap.
Click to expand...

...Exactly!

Yes, this is why the GH2 footage was the audience favorite pick at the theater screenings of the new 2012 Zacuto Camera Shootout ( the first installment should be released on the web later this month ) when the camera that shot the actual footage was NOT revealed, and overall was rated 3rd best camera just behind the Sony F65 and Arri Alexa. ( beating out the Canon C300, RED Epic, Sony F3 )

What a piece of crap.
 
TheDingo said:
...Exactly!

Yes, this is why the GH2 footage was the audience favorite pick at the theater screenings of the new 2012 Zacuto Camera Shootout ( the first installment should be released on the web later this month ) when the camera that shot the actual footage was NOT revealed, and overall was rated 3rd best camera just behind the Sony F65 and Arri Alexa. ( beating out the Canon C300, RED Epic, Sony F3 )

What a piece of crap.
Click to expand...

That's great, they aren't me. They aren't financing my films, they aren't raising the budgets, they aren't deciding what camera I use. They are welcome to their aesthetics just as I am welcome to mine. It's the "waa waa waa, boo frickin' hoo" defensiveness that's pathetic. I didn't call your girlfriend ugly, I didn't say your mom was fat. I said I don't like the image aesthetics of the camera you use so I use a different one, as do thousands upon thousands of other people. I'm not gonna break in your jhouse and steal your precious little baby. I don't give a rat's ass what you shoot on.
 
...For me, what the 2012 Zacuto Shootout shows is that you can achieve truly professional results with the GH2 if you really know what the heck you are doing.

I fully believe that the same results could have been obtained with the other cameras provided the operators/editors had the same skill level.

I also realize that the Zacuto Shootout took place in a very controlled environment, which allowed the GH2 team to work around the limitations of the camera. In an uncontrolled situation the results might have been very different.
 
The GH2 + hack is finicky. There are constant issues depending on the visual material you are shooting. Which means different patches for different material. I frequently have to reformat a card or pop out a battery because something invisible has gone wrong. I could not imagine shooting a feature on one of these guys, even if I do like the image. The bottom line is that when you have got a team waiting on you, you want something STABLE. I use Flowmotion now and there are still unexpected issues. Nature of the beast. Frankly, it is just easier working with the Canon cameras, whatever one may feel about the image quality.
And for photos, no, the GH2 cannot deliver like a 7D or a 5D and I don't expect it to.
Bottom line, right camera for the right situation is the only thing that matters.
 
yoclay said:
The GH2 + hack is finicky. There are constant issues depending on the visual material you are shooting. Which means different patches for different material. I frequently have to reformat a card or pop out a battery because something invisible has gone wrong. I.
Click to expand...

What card are you using? I've been using cake 2.3 and haven't had any problems at all. I've never found the need to change patches for each shoot please give an example?
 
I've been shooting ( 2 Indie films, a classical music concert, and about a dozen 10-30 minute interviews ) with the Quantum 100 ( 100 Mbps I-Frame ) hack for the past couple of months, and have experienced no issues what so ever with my GH2. It's been 100 percent reliable, first time, every time so far.

This makes me hesitant to try a different hack, as I want a completely reliable camera, so I'm very cautious about changing the firmware. ( the Quantum 100 is also a very good hack, so I haven't really found myself wanting something different so far )
 
gonzo_entertainment said:
That's great, they aren't me. They aren't financing my films, they aren't raising the budgets, they aren't deciding what camera I use. They are welcome to their aesthetics just as I am welcome to mine. It's the "waa waa waa, boo frickin' hoo" defensiveness that's pathetic. I didn't call your girlfriend ugly, I didn't say your mom was fat. I said I don't like the image aesthetics of the camera you use so I use a different one, as do thousands upon thousands of other people. I'm not gonna break in your jhouse and steal your precious little baby. I don't give a rat's ass what you shoot on.
Click to expand...

Thats a complete misrepresentation of this thread - what 90% of us are saying is that both the Canons and GH2s are fully capable of producing non-crap footage, so if it looks like crap - with either camera - its probably not the camera's limitations that are the problem.
 
I don't feel the need to use PL lenses or other brand lenses, L glass is good enough for me. I can use them both manually and automatic depending upon what I am shooting. Yes the alias and moire are issues but it doesn't really bother me that much. The c300 has way more features than just the sharpness to warrant that price tag, I think it also an entirely different user market.
 
mtan said:
The c300 has way more features than just the sharpness to warrant that price tag, I think it also an entirely different user market.
Click to expand...

Yes, definitely, but the C300 ( along with the EOS 1D-C and C500 ) are the only Canon cameras that can deliver GH2 ( or better ) sharpness right now.

If Canon made a 7D MKII with the feature set of the GH2, it would be an absolutely killer low cost solution, but right now Canon wants you to spend upwards of $15,000 to obtain this kind of result.
 
I'd really like to see the type of clips used for that Zacuto "audience favorite pick". I'm sure it will be some of those dingy dark scenes the GH2 is so good at :)

The place it's aesthetic falls down is in broad daylight and bright backlit highlight rendition. The Canon's do a much better job in the light of day IMHO

Cheers,
Pete
 
c3hammer said:
I'd really like to see the type of clips used for that Zacuto "audience favorite pick". I'm sure it will be some of those dingy dark scenes the GH2 is so good at :)
Click to expand...

The 2012 Zacuto Shootout is an interesting test, as they built this large set and lit it to have different types of challenges for the cameras to capture, but they let the camera teams modify the interior lighting to suit their camera, and it looks like the GH2 team did the best job of modifying the lighting to suit the limited range the GH2 can handle. ( which is the same thing that most of us will do when we can )

I am curious to see the Sony F65 results, as apparently the Sony F65 team made no modifications to any of the lighting, and were the only team allowed to use their own post facilities. ( all the other teams went through the same post production house )
 
TheDingo said:
Yes, definitely, but the C300 ( along with the EOS 1D-C and C500 ) are the only Canon cameras that can deliver GH2 ( or better ) sharpness right now.

If Canon made a 7D MKII with the feature set of the GH2, it would be an absolutely killer low cost solution, but right now Canon wants you to spend upwards of $15,000 to obtain this kind of result.
Click to expand...
People like me won't spend $15,000 for such a camera, I will just live with the results I am getting right now with the 7d. I am looking to get a camcorder to pair with my 7D for sharper wide shots but I think they are mostly overpriced. And I don't want to use the GH camera's as a solution, having 2 cameras that you need to change lenses for is impracticial for me and a royal pain. And as I said before I like the Canon DSLR look as well as the lens choices. For camcorders, the 1/3" xf100, for example, is not worth $3,000 when I can get the 7D for $1500 and a much larger chip as well as almost unlimed lens options. I feel sort of stuck right now until new stuff comes out.​
 
mtan said:
For camcorders, the 1/3" xf100, for example, is not worth $3,000 when I can get the 7D for $1500 and a much larger chip as well as almost unlimed lens options. I feel sort of stuck right now until new stuff comes out.
Click to expand...

...Canon has an interesting mix of 1/3 inch sensor camcorders right now: XF100, XA10, G10, HF-M500

I know that the last three cameras in my list do not have the XF100 50 Mbit 4:2:2 CODEC, but I would be very curious to see how the full HD video image compares between these models. ( I was shocked when I saw that the $539 HF-M500 camera is also using a 1/3 inch chip and is supposed to be very good with low light, which makes me wonder how the results compare between these cameras )

Canon VIXIA HF M500 : $539

Another low cost consumer camera to consider is the Panasonic HS900 ( three 1/4 inch chips ) which produces a very sharp image but is not as good with low-light shooting as the Canon cameras listed above, so you have to choose between low-light and high resolution. ( the HS900 is on sale right now at B&H Photo for $749 while quantities last )

Panasonic HDC-HS900 : $749
 
Looks like the new T4i dropped the 3x crop zoom as a feature that was in the T3i. This was the main reason I got into dslr's to be able to do incredible wildlife work with a 600mm at an effective 2880mm focal length. The only other cams to have anything like it are the GH2 and Nikon D4 at $6000.

I'm now seriously thinking of picking up a GH2 now with it's 2.7x crop function. Any rumors of a GH3 in the wind?

Cheers,
Pete
 
mtan said:
how good are the 1/3" sensors in low light? I have read they are not that good.
Click to expand...

Canon designed a special sensor with larger photosites for their 1/3" cameras so that it will outperform other 1/3" cameras when it comes to low light, but I think resolution takes a hit because of this.
 
Ok, this thread's getting me cold feet about an upcoming replacement of my 7D. I love 7D's nearly "out of the box" cinematic look. You just have to set it to M mode, Neutral, 1/50, lowest F and voilà, you're extremely close to movie look. But on the other hand, I can't stand the moire, the lack of sharpness and, most of all, the compression. Anything harder than a simple color correction just pops out the blocking.

I was seriously considering a GH2 and some old glass to get that extra sharpness, extra bitrate, no moire, while keeping the movie feeling, which is really important for me. But reading things like "I don't know what it is. Some shots look fantastic, while others just have VIDEO written all over them", just scare me a bit.

Now, if you say it's definitely a matter of choosing the right glass, being it old manual primes mostly, I can definitely deal with that without any problem.

I can definitely get video looking shots from my 7D if I want as well.

So what do you say... If I use it just for the video and I definitely want the movie look, is it a better option to get the GH2 and some old primes??

Thanks.
 
c3hammer said:
Looks like the new T4i dropped the 3x crop zoom as a feature that was in the T3i. This was the main reason I got into dslr's to be able to do incredible wildlife work with a 600mm at an effective 2880mm focal length. The only other cams to have anything like it are the GH2 and Nikon D4 at $6000.

I'm now seriously thinking of picking up a GH2 now with it's 2.7x crop function. Any rumors of a GH3 in the wind?

Cheers,
Pete
Click to expand...

I have both, and the ETC function on the GH2 is _way_ better than the T3i. My 720/60p crops (about 5x) look better than the 3x 1080p on the T3i.

BTW, just because it's not mentioned in any of the reviews so far, doesn't mean they dropped it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top