starmanric
Active member
Any info on comparisions?
starmanric
starmanric
GH2 Gh2-vg20
- Thread starter starmanric
- Start date
I am also very curious about this camera. The Sony VG20 has a lot of nice features (audio monitoring, AVCHD 2.0 allowing 1080/60p and 28mbps). Also, I like the fact that it has a larger sensor than m4/3. My ONLY frustration with the GH2's m4/3 sensor is the almost 2x crop factor (low light and image are still great) which can be a b**ch when wanting a nice wide shot. In addition the e-mount allows me to still use all my FD lenses on this (I believe).
On the flip side, is there really any difference between this an most other DSLRs??? The only REAL difference (cause I'm sure GH3 will have AVCHD2.0) is the fact that it has audio monitoring. They seemed to have missed the boat not offering some sort of servo-zoom and maybe a lens or two (sony proprietary) that allows servo. Also, just 1 xlr input would have been nice. Although if they added all that, it would be a little too perfect.
Any thoughts on why this would not be a good option over the GH2 (granted we have not seen any footage yet)???
On the flip side, is there really any difference between this an most other DSLRs??? The only REAL difference (cause I'm sure GH3 will have AVCHD2.0) is the fact that it has audio monitoring. They seemed to have missed the boat not offering some sort of servo-zoom and maybe a lens or two (sony proprietary) that allows servo. Also, just 1 xlr input would have been nice. Although if they added all that, it would be a little too perfect.
Any thoughts on why this would not be a good option over the GH2 (granted we have not seen any footage yet)???
This is what I've been able to glean from press releases -- we won't know for sure until reviewers and consumers get their hands on the camera:
1. The VG20 has full manual audio control, the GH2 does not.
2. The VG20 has a headphone jack for in-camera audio monitoring, the GH2 does not.
3. The VG20 has focus peaking and zebras, the GH2 does not.
4. The VG20 shoots 1080/60p, the GH2 does not.
5. The VG20 has a 5.1 channel surround sound mic, the GH2 does not.
6. The VG20 has 2 record buttons, the GH2 has 1.
7. The VG20 has an APS sensor, larger and with less crop than the GH2's micro 4/3 sensor.
8. For those who someday want to rent or buy a pro camcorder, the VG20 shares lens mounts with the FS100 and its even larger Super 35mm sensor, while the GH2 shares mounts with the comparatively smaller micro 4/3 sensor AF100.
This is the first camera that causes me to consider selling my GH2 -- but I will wait until I see real-world video out of the production version.
Cheers,
Bill
1. The VG20 has full manual audio control, the GH2 does not.
2. The VG20 has a headphone jack for in-camera audio monitoring, the GH2 does not.
3. The VG20 has focus peaking and zebras, the GH2 does not.
4. The VG20 shoots 1080/60p, the GH2 does not.
5. The VG20 has a 5.1 channel surround sound mic, the GH2 does not.
6. The VG20 has 2 record buttons, the GH2 has 1.
7. The VG20 has an APS sensor, larger and with less crop than the GH2's micro 4/3 sensor.
8. For those who someday want to rent or buy a pro camcorder, the VG20 shares lens mounts with the FS100 and its even larger Super 35mm sensor, while the GH2 shares mounts with the comparatively smaller micro 4/3 sensor AF100.
This is the first camera that causes me to consider selling my GH2 -- but I will wait until I see real-world video out of the production version.
Cheers,
Bill
For me it all comes down to image quality... We won't know until somebody posts a proper review, but some of the sample VG20 videos have shown a little bit of moire in water and landscape scenes.
Despite the hassle when it comes to audio monitoring, I would still keep using the GH-2 if the image quality is noticeably better.
Despite the hassle when it comes to audio monitoring, I would still keep using the GH-2 if the image quality is noticeably better.
Jonathan Briceño
Active member
ON 1:18 of the vg20 video there is a masive light clip all over the left side of the farmer men, and for the rest of the video, i see no much Dynamic range then the GH2. The have solved very well the moire issue but the alising is still there. Maybe its only my point of view.
ed_lee83
Well-known member
The VG20 is definitely the contender in potentially replacing my GH2 (or maybe reducing it to B-cam) this year, and within my budget.
brunwerww's points all ring true with me.
Other points (correct if i'm wrong): Longer battery life, less/no moire, rolling shutter, jello effect... Video tripod mounting holes for more sturdiness... ergonomics is simply more suited to video than the GH2, though I have adapted it to be more video-friendly already.
But ultimately it's about the larger sensor size. I tried my Lomo anamorphic lenses on the NEX-5N (http://vimeo.com/28359174) today and it was the first time seeing them on an APS sensor and I really liked the depth of field.
I mean, hacked GH2's picture quality is awesome but I guess more bit rate doesn't make me shoot better videos.
Wait for reviews... Wait for reviews...
brunwerww's points all ring true with me.
Other points (correct if i'm wrong): Longer battery life, less/no moire, rolling shutter, jello effect... Video tripod mounting holes for more sturdiness... ergonomics is simply more suited to video than the GH2, though I have adapted it to be more video-friendly already.
But ultimately it's about the larger sensor size. I tried my Lomo anamorphic lenses on the NEX-5N (http://vimeo.com/28359174) today and it was the first time seeing them on an APS sensor and I really liked the depth of field.
I mean, hacked GH2's picture quality is awesome but I guess more bit rate doesn't make me shoot better videos.
Wait for reviews... Wait for reviews...
thisisapocalypse
Well-known member
The difference between the m4/3 sensor in 16:9 mode and an aps-c sensor is so minor that the real-world difference is practically negligible. Granted I haven't seen VG-20 footage yet, but I found VG-10 footage very disappointing and I wonder how different the VG-20 footage is going to look in practice. The GH1/GH2 and all the Canons creamed the VG10 in terms of video quality IMO having used them all.
With regards to manual audio control/monitoring on the camera, these cameras record audio that's so compressed it's practically not worth having as anything other than a scratch track...and 5.1 on built in mics? I don't see the point whatsoever, I've yet to see (really, hear) one of these cameras get it right with a *single* mic...let alone 3-4-5-6 or however many it will have. Just give me one good one, or better yet, one really, really bad one...I mean really bad, barely scratch-track worthy bad and save me a few bucks since I'm just going to use it for a scratch/sync track anyhow.
You simply cannot fit really good audio circuitry into cameras of this size and in this price-range -- I just don't see how this remains such a sticking point with good portable recorders coming down in price as much as they have recently with sound quality so much better than what these cameras can offer and in much more robust formats.
I think folks just don't want to bother with the work it takes to get good sound more than anything else...but that will bite you in the end. Not saying it's unreasonable to want these features, I just don't see how they translate to real-world use in a meaningful way (at this price point and with these formats.)
60p is very nice if you need it though.
With regards to manual audio control/monitoring on the camera, these cameras record audio that's so compressed it's practically not worth having as anything other than a scratch track...and 5.1 on built in mics? I don't see the point whatsoever, I've yet to see (really, hear) one of these cameras get it right with a *single* mic...let alone 3-4-5-6 or however many it will have. Just give me one good one, or better yet, one really, really bad one...I mean really bad, barely scratch-track worthy bad and save me a few bucks since I'm just going to use it for a scratch/sync track anyhow.
You simply cannot fit really good audio circuitry into cameras of this size and in this price-range -- I just don't see how this remains such a sticking point with good portable recorders coming down in price as much as they have recently with sound quality so much better than what these cameras can offer and in much more robust formats.
I think folks just don't want to bother with the work it takes to get good sound more than anything else...but that will bite you in the end. Not saying it's unreasonable to want these features, I just don't see how they translate to real-world use in a meaningful way (at this price point and with these formats.)
60p is very nice if you need it though.
Last edited:
ed_lee83
Well-known member
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't APS-C 40% bigger than m4/3? That doesn't sound so minor. But I noticed you wrote 16:9 mode...
thisisapocalypse
Well-known member
Right, in 16:9 mode the crop isn't quite 2x, it's around 1.9. I'm not saying there's no difference, but when you're talking about the total area of the APS-C sensor in this mode only being on the order of ~17% larger at the maximum (m4/3 in 16x9 mode is appx. 85% the size of aps-c, or you can also express this as aps-c being 1.17x larger than m4/3 in 16x9 mode) its just not a difference that is significant enough to be a real-world a factor on set most of the time. An m4/3 camera and an aps-c camera are both going to do well in situations that allow for a camera with a sensor size in that range. In a situation where an aps-c camera will work an m4/3 camera is going to work in all but extreme circumstances.
That's often not the case though with FF35 vs aps-c/m4/3. You can do stuff with FF35 than you'll never pull off with aps-c or m4/3.
I did notice that you said you were using LOMO anamorphics. With anamorphics being adapted for these cameras, I'd be willing to say all bets are off -- we're using these lenses in ways they were never intended....17% additional area might make a real difference when using a 2X anamorphics as you're really picking twice that factor in terms of additional wide-angle FOV data once you unsqueeze the image...my point is speaking to normal spherical shooting where the difference really is quite tiny.
That's often not the case though with FF35 vs aps-c/m4/3. You can do stuff with FF35 than you'll never pull off with aps-c or m4/3.
I did notice that you said you were using LOMO anamorphics. With anamorphics being adapted for these cameras, I'd be willing to say all bets are off -- we're using these lenses in ways they were never intended....17% additional area might make a real difference when using a 2X anamorphics as you're really picking twice that factor in terms of additional wide-angle FOV data once you unsqueeze the image...my point is speaking to normal spherical shooting where the difference really is quite tiny.
Last edited:
John Caballero
Veteran
Jerry,
The problem with adapting Canon EF lenses is not the camera -- it's the lens. EF lenses don't have a manual aperture ring like Nikkors do, so aperture control on non-native cameras is problematic. There are workarounds, such as adapters with adjustable diaphragms and the forthcoming Birger mount for NEX, but without a workaround, EF lenses are pretty much crippled on non-native mirrorless cameras.
Cheers,
Bill
The problem with adapting Canon EF lenses is not the camera -- it's the lens. EF lenses don't have a manual aperture ring like Nikkors do, so aperture control on non-native cameras is problematic. There are workarounds, such as adapters with adjustable diaphragms and the forthcoming Birger mount for NEX, but without a workaround, EF lenses are pretty much crippled on non-native mirrorless cameras.
Cheers,
Bill
Last edited:
thisisapocalypse
Well-known member
Just my opinion, for what I do and my aesthetic I don't like the way it renders an image -- I found it noisy and I didn't like its color rendition. Obviously it's still a capable camera and may be right for certain situations, but I wouldn't recommend it over a GH1/2 or Canon DSLR unless one really needed a particular feature unique to the VG10.
apocalypse,
I felt the same way about the VG10, but the one HD sample I've seen from the VG20 has raised my hopes that we may finally have an interchangeable lens, large-sensor camcorder around $2000 that delivers the image quality of the GH2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XhE_i0ZpaKQ
Promo videos are not the best basis for camera buying decisions, so I'll wait to see more footage and reviews. That said, at this point, this looks like the camera that I have been waiting for.
Cheers,
Bill
I felt the same way about the VG10, but the one HD sample I've seen from the VG20 has raised my hopes that we may finally have an interchangeable lens, large-sensor camcorder around $2000 that delivers the image quality of the GH2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XhE_i0ZpaKQ
Promo videos are not the best basis for camera buying decisions, so I'll wait to see more footage and reviews. That said, at this point, this looks like the camera that I have been waiting for.
Cheers,
Bill
joe1946
Veteran
The VG20 and the new Nex-5N have the same sensor that looks soft compared to the GH2 in this video:
BTW Sony shows the VG20 videos limited to 24mb/sec and not 28mb/sec like the Nex-5N.
BTW Sony shows the VG20 videos limited to 24mb/sec and not 28mb/sec like the Nex-5N.
http://store.sony.com/webapp/wcs/st...10151&langId=-1&productId=8198552921666376731
http://store.sony.com/webapp/wcs/st...&productId=8198552921666375231#specifications
Thanks, Joe. I agree -- not as sharp as my unhacked GH2, but that's OK. And the same 24Mbps bitrate -- that's OK too.
I do like the sensitivity that I'm seeing in the clips from the new NEX sensor, though.
That said, I will wait to download original files from the VG20 before I make a decision.
Cheers,
Bill
I do like the sensitivity that I'm seeing in the clips from the new NEX sensor, though.
That said, I will wait to download original files from the VG20 before I make a decision.
Cheers,
Bill
You can view some of my comments + screenshots from this page coming from original raw files form the vg20 and nex-5 (apparently preproduction models - not that the latest EOSHD nex-5 footage looks better anyway...)
From an image quality point of view ALL the new Sonys have nothing to offer more than the GH2, Panasonic is the ONLY company right now that is able to deliver true, aliasing/moiré free 1080p video, and the hack makes it look like having a baby RED for how sharp it is.
And from what I've seen from the a77 samples that are around on the net, the videos looks so bad in resolution that I'm not that sure to exclude that they look worse than the Canons :undecided(2008 processor), I'm not kidding! If they can't deliver a good clean video with a 16mp sensor how can they with a 24mp one??
From an image quality point of view ALL the new Sonys have nothing to offer more than the GH2, Panasonic is the ONLY company right now that is able to deliver true, aliasing/moiré free 1080p video, and the hack makes it look like having a baby RED for how sharp it is.
And from what I've seen from the a77 samples that are around on the net, the videos looks so bad in resolution that I'm not that sure to exclude that they look worse than the Canons :undecided(2008 processor), I'm not kidding! If they can't deliver a good clean video with a 16mp sensor how can they with a 24mp one??
Joe - pretty sure the omission of 28mbps for 1080/60p is a typo on the US site. The UK site shows 28mbps:
http://www.sony.co.uk/product/cam-high-definition-on-memory-stick/nex-vg20eh#pageType=TechnicalSpecs
http://www.sony.co.uk/product/cam-high-definition-on-memory-stick/nex-vg20eh#pageType=TechnicalSpecsThe US site also omits the sensor size on the specs page, while the UK site includes it. Pretty sloppy on the part of Sony USA.
Cheers,
Bill