GH2 Tests (with a gh13 perspective)

[Blackout]

First of all Hunter, thank you very much for uploading the native .mtf files. I have just been a/b ing them back and forth... played them on my win 7 machine on a 26 inch 108p monitor in media player and in power dvd and total media theater 3,and on a panasonic bd-45 blu ray player just to make sure what I am seeing is the file and not the decoder. Here are my thoughts and observations:


In the GH2, I do see mud, from 30 seconds to 34 seconds when the light flares up, the detail in the bark of the tree goes mud. Is it absolutely horrible? No, but it's definitely there. Now the GH13 part where you it the light flare is not exactly the same, but it appeared to not mud up the tree bark... the timing doesn't appear to be dead on, but look at the tree bark when the light flares from the sun in the sky, and it breaks up / muds loses detail on the GH2, it does not on the GH13.

Also, you appear to be on a very fast shutter.. it's very stroby. What shutter were you at? Perhaps you said it earlier in the thread.

Using mediainfo on the GH2 clip, it shows 21.3 bitrate, were you in the 24 cin mode on the GH2?
the mediainfo on the GH13 shows 42.2 mbits.

Overall, the GH2 appears sharper, but I would not necessarily call that a better image.. they both seem to be getting the same amount of aliasing. Strangely, the GH2 seems to be suffering from a lot more jello than the gh13.

Again, extreme thanks for providing these clips. I haven't looked at the snow clip yet.

From these clips, I am still going to stand by what I have personally observed in what I shot and saw, and what I have downloaded from you and the few others who have provided native .mts clips:

The GH2 is sharper. On loocked down shots and on slow pans, tilts on a tripod and on medium and close ups, it's going to look better than the GH13 because of it's improved sensitivity. However, it does have mud, I saw it clear as day from 30 to 34 seconds on the trees. My hacked GH13s are going at an even higher bit rate than yours, but even your clip here does not show the tree break up like it does on the GH2 when the light flares, so that is when the 24mbit codec is having problems.

So, for $999, I'll probably pick up a GH2 with the poo lens or without the lens if they sell just the body, to hold me over to the af-100, but I am without a doubt keeping my GH13s as I do see issues with the GH2 codec still. The combination of both camera, with the GH2s sharpening turned down a bit, would be best, and keeping the GH13 when crazy codec busting stuff happens. At least in my opinion, than ditching your GH13 for the GH2 is a much better idea.

Again, thanks so much for actually responding and being very helpful. If you pmail me your address I shall send you a case of corndogs. (I'm not kidding).

- Blackout

 

[Emanuel]

Thanks Hunter for your tests. Glad you put your effort to try to stress the codec as fair as possible. Also, once you wouldn't have the same glass piece for each units, well seen that you had chosen the 20mm pancake for the most curious point on an useful comparison feature, to know if the GH13 does worth of a replacement for the new comer GH2.

Valuable input on the HDMI output information too (finally, something of solid ;-)

Best wishes for your recovering,
E.

 

[Emanuel]

First of all Hunter, thank you very much for uploading the native .mtf files. I have just been a/b ing them back and forth... played them on my win 7 machine on a 26 inch 108p monitor in media player and in power dvd and total media theater 3,and on a panasonic bd-45 blu ray player just to make sure what I am seeing is the file and not the decoder. Here are my thoughts and observations:


In the GH2, I do see mud, from 30 seconds to 34 seconds when the light flares up, the detail in the bark of the tree goes mud. Is it absolutely horrible? No, but it's definitely there. Now the GH13 part where you it the light flare is not exactly the same, but it appeared to not mud up the tree bark... the timing doesn't appear to be dead on, but look at the tree bark when the light flares from the sun in the sky, and it breaks up / muds loses detail on the GH2, it does not on the GH13.

Also, you appear to be on a very fast shutter.. it's very stroby. What shutter were you at? Perhaps you said it earlier in the thread.

Using mediainfo on the GH2 clip, it shows 21.3 bitrate, were you in the 24 cin mode on the GH2?
the mediainfo on the GH13 shows 42.2 mbits.

Overall, the GH2 appears sharper, but I would not necessarily call that a better image.. they both seem to be getting the same amount of aliasing. Strangely, the GH2 seems to be suffering from a lot more jello than the gh13.

Again, extreme thanks for providing these clips. I haven't looked at the snow clip yet.

From these clips, I am still going to stand by what I have personally observed in what I shot and saw, and what I have downloaded from you and the few others who have provided native .mts clips:

The GH2 is sharper. On loocked down shots and on slow pans, tilts on a tripod and on medium and close ups, it's going to look better than the GH13 because of it's improved sensitivity. However, it does have mud, I saw it clear as day from 30 to 34 seconds on the trees. My hacked GH13s are going at an even higher bit rate than yours, but even your clip hear does not show the tree break up like it does on the GH2 when the light flares, so that is when the 24mbit codec is having problems.

So, for $999, I'll probably pick up a GH2 with the poo lens or without the lens if they sell just the body, to hold me over to the af-100, but I am without a doubt keeping my GH13s as I do see issues with the GH2 codec still. The combination of both camera, with the GH2s sharpening turned down a bit, would be best, and keeping the GH13 when crazy codec busting stuff happens. At least in my opinion, than ditching your GH13 for the GH2.

Again, thanks so much for actually responding and being very helpful.

- Blackout

Michael, interesting conclusions from your comment's part, as well (E.

 

[shooter_]

Valuable input on the HDMI output information too (finally, something of solid ;-)

But not exactly the best news...

Excuse my ignorance but isn't that what we want? 24p has been embedded in 60i for years right? All we need to do is pulldown removal.

Hey, I wonder the same!
Anyone can explain why should we lose resolution as Hunter implies in his saying?

 

[mimirsan]

Thankyou Hunter for being probably the first to show these kind of stress tests...no we can finally "look" at the GH13/GH2 comparison....which will go a long way to put some questions to rest.
For me sadly...GH2 I see a lot of artifacts around the trees,rooftops etc and its quite noisy footage and more shocking a lot of alaising! and this is only from minimal handheld movement...your GH1 footage suprised me also... I dont get this result with my GH1 *I have a very complex messy garden and have shot against sunlight very similar situations to your demos*
I feel yep its a lot better than a unhacked GH1...but a full on hacked GH1...not so much. Im convinced I wont be upgrading.

But again thankyou for uploading the files its better to see evidence first hand.

 

[mimirsan]

both bodies combined cost less than 5d. Unless it's illegal to own both I don't see why the hostility and assumption that a tester is picking sides is needed. Hunter is trying to illuminate, lpowell is making good points, blackout is asking constructive questions, I don't think it's a contest. If roles were reversed I still believe and have that the guys here will try and double/triple check every aspect of the test. Does Hunter get a porsche if he wins? Does lpowell get the porsche if he wins? wins what? There is pre-hack end result footage out there that just shows that both the gh13 and the gh2 perform better than the original gh1, which was used by lots of people, to make really nice footage, provided what was going on in front of the camera was interesting, which is the point to all of this.

Sorry, not to negate the need for any test, on the contrary I love how everyone keeps tabs on every variable it's awesome, i learn a lot end of the day, as do many ppl here. I guess this is just me retorting without requiring a question. But several good posts are like 'the forum is on a roll', and that just kills it.

Well said!

 

[zidane]

Last edited by Blackout; Today at 06:01 AM. Reason: zebras attacked me

wth do you mean?

 

[Blackout]

Lol. Whenever I edit a msg, I put in something silly for the reason. It's usually just for spelling or something dumb like your / you're or hear / here that I don't catch when I am typing at light speed.

Go back through my posts and read the edit reasons and they are like the little messages on Bazooka gum "help, I'm trapped in a gum factory!"

Back to the thread... on looking at the footage more and more I would say you can see the issues most right at about 31 seconds on the GH2 clip. When the light flares, the detail of the gradient of the light makes almost all the detail in the tree bark disappear, and then it returns at about 35 seconds into the clip. This does not happen on the GH13 footage... and I agree with mimi that this GH13 footage may not be set as good as it could.

So again... you really can't go wrong with having it... in production terms it's cheap, even disposable. But I would not trade my gh13 for it. Only add it to the arsenal.

 

[plasmasmp]

But I would not trade my gh13 for it. Only add it to the arsenal.

I feel the same. I've seen weird results from both. They are so cheap you might as well have both camera bodies around and leave the Canon's to collect dust. Poor 7D has been plotting against me with the DVX100. I have a feeling blackmail will be involved, and I will have to fondle their combined magnesium chassis in order to solve the situation.

 

[Blackout]

I feel the same. I've seen weird results from both. They are so cheap you might as well have both camera bodies around and leave the Canon's to collect dust. Poor 7D has been plotting against me with the DVX100. I have a feeling blackmail will be involved, and I will have to fondle their combined magnesium chassis in order to solve the situation.

Yeah this whole sort of 'war' broke out between the 7D camp and the GH1 camp pre hack and I agonized... at that time, I was really broke and was scraping pennies to purchase the camera and I went 7D first and regretted it - yet a whole industry has sprung up around the mushy over saturated 7D, where as all these cool parts and support don't really exist for the GH1.

The GH1, with the hack, has paid for itself 10 times over for me... I can say the GH13 hack has made me the money to afford the af-100 without worry if I want it. So I have no qualms, it has been quite the trooper miracle camera and I have seen my stuff projected right after EX1 productions and I blew them out of the water and the ex1 ain't cheap. I figured the GH13... it's delicate parts... and just like a good women ya got to know how to maneuver and treat her right, and she'll show you some really nice stuff.

 

[Emanuel]

... It's delicate parts... And just like a good women ya got to know how to maneuver and treat her right, and she'll show you some really nice stuff.

:laugh:

 

[Blackout]

:laugh:

Hey Emanuel I tried to PM you about that short "Brand New Day" it is still looking for a festival to premiere in, your PM box is flooded I can't write you there and the director asked me about you. Any chance you can place that somewhere? PM me or call me or whatever.

- Blackout

 

[Skeptikal]

A useful first time evaluation...but I tend to agree with much of what Ipowell is saying.

I'm hoping that the Pal GH2 will be a worthy addition to my GH13's...but until I get my hands on one and do the comparative evaluation rigorously...maybe a few dozen varied scenes: cameras side-by-side on a Velbon dual camera bracket; IDENTICAL lenses (yes I have a couple each of 7-14mm, 14-45mm and 20mm) and compensation for various parameters which may differentiate the models' baseline...ie factory settings... (intrinsic sharpness settings; default sensor characteristics ...think GH13 vs GF13); and static vs various panning speeds...I'll just wait and see.

 

[Uwe Lansing]

...
In the GH2, I do see mud, from 30 seconds to 34 seconds when the light flares up, the detail in the bark of the tree goes mud. Is it absolutely horrible? No, but it's definitely there. Now the GH13 part where you it the light flare is not exactly the same, but it appeared to not mud up the tree bark... the timing doesn't appear to be dead on, but look at the tree bark when the light flares from the sun in the sky, and it breaks up / muds loses detail on the GH2, it does not on the GH13.
...

I suppose you can´t judge it in this way because

- the angle of view is slightly different and therefore the reflections of the sun are different

gh13


gh2


But if you take a closer look at that part of the images you can clearly see what´s going on there and which one has the overall better image quality in every respect:

left side gh13, right gh2


These are just screenshots of the Vimeo clips...

 

[noirist]

Yes, I understand that it was meant as a casual comparison rather than a rigorous test. My point, however, is that the flaws in the tests are in fact serious enough to invalidate the original poster's conclusions. For that reason I don't believe we learned anything new about the GH2 from this test.

I agree that the difference in flare creates a disadvantage for the camera that is getting more direct sun in its lens. The simplest way to redo the test is to shoot with the sun behind the cameras so there's no flare in either one. Aside from the flare discrepancy, which I agree is material, I like the idea of mounting the cameras on top of each other so they record very similar footage during panning.

And either way, or any way, thank you Hunter for posting the footage!

 

[noirist]

I suppose you can´t judge it in this way because
- the angle of view is slightly different and therefore the reflections of the sun are different
But if you take a closer look at that part of the images you can clearly see what´s going on there and which one has the overall better image quality in every respect

Another (arguably bigger) difference for those two shots is that the cameras are using very different lenses (20mm f1.7 vs. 14-42mm) that respond differently to direct sunlight. And you can see from the first shot that the lens on the GH13 is having more trouble with direct sun.

 

[Blackout]

You can throw stills up all day and all night. I don't watch stills, I watch moving pictures. To me, and again the key phrasing here is (TO ME), even in this casual comparison, both cameras have issues, but to my eyes the issues are worse with the GH2. There are slightly different issues and I say my hacked GH13 would capture this scene a hell of a lot better, but I'd have to be there with my cam. If you prefer the look of the moving images of the GH2 in this comparison then you do, and no one will convince you otherwise, nor should they. If YOU like the look the cam is for you. I don't. I really don't like the look of either of these cameras in both of these shots.... it wasn't as if he actually set the cameras up carefully, he just kinda did it casually as he said.

I am overly sensitive to 'mud' and digital compression blockies than most. I can't watch sports on tv because when they pan fast in wide shots and the crowd's heads all start turning into blocks, it is equivalent to... someone scratching their nails on a bare chalkboard..to me..... that 'screeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeech' sound... but it is doing it to my eyes.... It drives me nuts.

That's just me though. I know plenty people in the room who give me the old elbow and go "look at that picture ehhh!!! ain't this the life! hi def!"

Ugh...

 

[Ian-T]

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.

 

[Hunter Hampton]

lol i couldnt help it. when u said first snow after looking at the streetlight, i was like "double snow all the way" Wahahahahahaha u sounded just like him.

Lol, I should have gone that route.

 

[Hunter Hampton]

I looked at Hunters snow MTS file at 1920x1080 on my pc and I dont see any horizontal line, I do see a fair amount of noise and a not to sharp of an image. I guess I need more practice at pixel peeping.

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.