GH2 Tests (with a gh13 perspective)

hunter richards said:
I didnt notice the line on that clip either, but maybe its there? If it does seem to be there we should point this out to panasonic to try to get them to fix it. BTW- its soft because the 50mm FD 1.4 is pretty soft and bloomy wide open.
Click to expand...

i have it in my Japanese model and i wrote Panny global service.. try to shoot some dark underexposed 800-3200 iso shots and you'll see it
traveling on screen quite clearly while you change shutter speeds..
tell me what else we could do in order to get this fixed (i'm quite pessimistic)
 
Ian-T said:
All good points Blackout.

For me though what I like about the GH-2 over the GH-1(3) (from the samples I've seen) in terms of mud (or lack thereof) is the static "mud-less" shots. What I'm saying is there seems to be less mud in the shadows on the GH-2. I've always had a problem with this not only from the GH-1(3) but from most AVCHD cameras it seems. If you don't know what I mean...film some green trees or grass off at a distance. Look very closley at the areas that start to get dark. It's as if the cam has a hard time keeping the detail and gets a little mushy. Like I said...I've been seeing this in most AVCHD cameras. But what's obvious to me is the GH-2 keeps more detail in the shadow areas...or it seems to get less..."silky"...than the GH-1(3). Can this be an indicator of the camera having a slightly better dynamic range? WIth all those pixels squeezed into virtually the same sized sensor I honestly expected the GH-2 to fair a little worse.
Click to expand...

Yes. I agree with you on this. An excellent shooting combo would be the GH2 for your static lock down shots or low light shots, and a GH13 for high detail action in bright light shots. You can't go wrong with that combo. You will kick booty.
 
mojo43 said:
Ok I will try again tonight, but I did a bunch of tests when I first applied the hack and never got anything like this. I don't have 24p checked so maybe that is why. I guess that will always be the problem. Every GH13 is different based on the hack settings. I was just really taken back on how bad those grabs looked. Thanks again...
Click to expand...

Well I am eating my words... I redid a test today at 1/640 by waving my camera around like a madman and sure enough the mud appeared just like in Hunter's second pic. I guess I have never seen anything like this come out of a GH13 because I would never shoot a scene like this. Thanks again Hunter...Image2.jpg
 
Last edited:
mojo43 said:
I guess I have never seen anything like this come out of a GH13 because I would never shoot a scene like this. Thanks again Hunter...View attachment 26470
Click to expand...

Hopefully most of us shoot this way. I don't foresee mud being an issue on a GH2 if you don't shoot in this condition. Even so, it's pretty minimal. They definitely improved it.

And I agree that as many people who can verify that the line in footage is an issue should do it soon. (And do it without causing mass panic...) I have not seen what people are talking about, but if it's there we should collectively write customer service to get this fixed in firmware. It's not something evident in AF100 footage so maybe all it takes is some firmware tweaking...
 
Isaac_Brody said:
Hopefully most of us shoot this way. I don't foresee mud being an issue on a GH2 if you don't shoot in this condition. Even so, it's pretty minimal. They definitely improved it.

And I agree that as many people who can verify that the line in footage is an issue should do it soon. (And do it without causing mass panic...) I have not seen what people are talking about, but if it's there we should collectively write customer service to get this fixed in firmware. It's not something evident in AF100 footage so maybe all it takes is some firmware tweaking...
Click to expand...

you mean the horizontal lines in underexposed high iso footage ? i'll be happy to complain :) - tell me what to do
 
Vitaliy Kiselev said:
Note that 60i is worse and 720p even have same as GH1 encoder.
They did not bother to rewrite encoder for 720p.
Click to expand...

Vitaliy, why is 60i/50i worse than GH1? I thoght they improved the codec too, well it looked like it on stream parser, is this not the case? Also 1080i on GH1 with wrapper until your hack was a mess, so am not understanding your point here? 1080i footage of GH2 has looked very good for the bit rate.
 
Adventsam said:
Vitaliy, why is 60i/50i worse than GH1? I thoght they improved the codec too, well it looked like it on stream parser, is this not the case? Also 1080i on GH1 with wrapper until your hack was a mess, so am not understanding your point here? 1080i footage of GH2 has looked very good for the bit rate.
Click to expand...

On the GH2, IIRC, 60i is 60 fields (interlaced frames) per second which means if there is motion, you can never combine 2 fields to make a frame without interlacing artifacts. On the GH1, 60i was 24 progressive frames that were split up in to 60 fields, so you could actually get nice looking progressive frames (OK, maybe not that nice because of the pulldown).
 
lpowell said:
Sorry, but I think this is one of the serious flaws that invalidated this test. The difference in framing of the GH1 image produced significantly more lens flare and overexposure from the direct sunlight than is visible in the GH2 image. That alone could account for the differences in the two images.

To make a valid direct comparison between any two cameras, the framing must at minimum be locked down in the same position and preferably on the same tripod. In addition, lighting and exposure must be matched as closely as possible. Significant differences in ISO sensitivity between GH1 and GH2 cameras have been documented here:

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Camera-Sensor/Compare-sensors/%28appareil1%29/677|0/%28appareil2%29/630|0/%28onglet%29/0/%28brand%29/Panasonic/%28brand2%29/Panasonic
Click to expand...
I immediately noticed, that GH13 footage is brighter than GH2. Clearly GH13 is overexposed, which results in less detail being resolved.
The observations correletes with ISO sensivity of the cameras(GH13 > GH2) and the fact that same settings were used for the test.

Unfortunately, the test is unreliable.
 
The ISO point is a major one. In fact, it could explain most or all of the detail difference independent of codec efficiency - because the codec wants to give the most detail to sharp things near the middle (or slightly above) of the histogram, and the GH1 is overexposed well past this point in this test.

To be a valid test, you likely have to set the GH1's ISO at least a full stop lower than the GH2's, with all other exposure settings remaining the same.
 
So I download the MTS footage and the focal length is not the same. I compared the frames VERY closely as I was trying to analyze the rolling shutter between the two and the GH13 is a bit wider so I cannot compare them on these shots.

If someone can frame an EXACT same FoV between two shots, I can try and compare that. It has to be accurate because the longer the focal length, the more impact of the pan movement. These clips give the impression that the GH2 has much worse rolling shutter because of this, which if you line the clips up, you can see very easily that they are not the same.
Sequence 01.jpg

The left image is the GH2 and the right image is the GH13. You can tell the difference because of how much of the left window is cropped out in the GH2 version. Granted, their shutters are not synced, but the right side of the image, even with the skew, does not account for that much of the image being different.

(You can check this by taking the photo into photoshop and compare any ONE line of the image to the same line in the other image (as close as possible). When comparing ONE line, there is no skew to deal with, so you can measure the FoV difference by that line alone.)
 
Last edited:
Futurity + dasbin-

Look 5 posts up at mojo43's picture, he got the same results I did on his hacked gh1 and his image wasnt "overexposed".
 
It was Hunter's test against the 5D that made me order a GH1 and hack it. Now here I am ordering a GH2.
 
plasmasmp said:
It was Hunter's test against the 5D that made me order a GH1 and hack it. Now here I am ordering a GH2.
Click to expand...
Ditto +10 lol

@grimepooch ...the reason for the higher slant in the GH-2's image vs the GH-1 is because of the zoom lens (kit lens) used on the GH-2 vs a wide angle (20mm) on the GH-1 (IMO...but I could be wrong). Also, I find my 20mm lens is less contrast(y) than my 14-140mm kit lens. Remember this is just a casual test...not scientific.
 
NOTES ON IMAGE QUALITY VERUS 5D MARK II and GH1

Image quality is subjective. Some have valid reasons for liking the 5D Mark II and it's full frame sensor. Some will love the 60D's image. But Canon are now significantly behind Panasonic in terms of the overall video performance.

The Panasonic GH2 resolves significantly more detail with less noise than even the 5D Mark II at ISO 3200.

It's sensor is 3 years newer than the 5D Mark II's which accounts somewhat for the M43 sized sensor being able to catch up with full frame beast, coupled with poor image processor in video mode on the 5D Mark II. In terms of stills mode with RAW photos, 5D Mark II's sensor stretches it's full frame muscles and moves way ahead of the GH2 as you'd expect, and it gives you an insight into how important video processing chips are.

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.

http://www.eoshd.com/content/465-Canon-60D-versus-Panasonic-GH2-Full-Review-Part-2
 
joe1946 said:
NOTES ON IMAGE QUALITY VERUS 5D MARK II and GH1

Image quality is subjective. Some have valid reasons for liking the 5D Mark II and it's full frame sensor. Some will love the 60D's image. But Canon are now significantly behind Panasonic in terms of the overall video performance.

The Panasonic GH2 resolves significantly more detail with less noise than even the 5D Mark II at ISO 3200.

It's sensor is 3 years newer than the 5D Mark II's which accounts somewhat for the M43 sized sensor being able to catch up with full frame beast, coupled with poor image processor in video mode on the 5D Mark II. In terms of stills mode with RAW photos, 5D Mark II's sensor stretches it's full frame muscles and moves way ahead of the GH2 as you'd expect, and it gives you an insight into how important video processing chips are.

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.

http://www.eoshd.com/content/465-Canon-60D-versus-Panasonic-GH2-Full-Review-Part-2
Click to expand...


Wow... there are so many things that are wrong with this post that I don't know where to start.
 
joe1946 said:
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!

http://www.eoshd.com/content/465-Canon-60D-versus-Panasonic-GH2-Full-Review-Part-2
Click to expand...
Joe, the GH2 fans here are dealing with blue horizontal banding, delayed ship dates, and the imminent release of the awesomely enviable AF100. What they really don't need is a kiss of death from a notoriously discredited source. Show a little class, please.
 
Last edited:
joe1946 said:
If it is there, then it's something only idiots notice!
Click to expand...


Lol. If its there, that's a problem. I love how Andrew Reid is making fun of my conclusions from pre-production videos! Per usual, he's trolling for the millions of views I get.

I wish the EOSHD block thing still worked.
 
Futurity said:
I immediately noticed, that GH13 footage is brighter than GH2. Clearly GH13 is overexposed, which results in less detail being resolved....
Unfortunately, the test is unreliable.
Click to expand...
The footage is very interesting, they just are different--I'm sure we will see very soon apples to apples. To me, one is distinctly brighter, but I wasn't there. Anyway, thanks for the footage, look forward to seeing more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top