GH2 will _not_ included in Zacuto's 2011 Great Camera Shootout!?!

Status
Not open for further replies.
I understand some camera's being left out. I don't mind all the Canon cameras being left out, because frankly, they all obtain video in a similar way. You don't need to include the T2i, T3i, 60D, 7D, 5d, and 1D all in the shootout. But to not include the GH2... a major player in the HDSLR market... that's dumb.

I don't really plan on watching it now, which isn't the end of the world (for Zacuto or me... it's just sad that they chose to not include one of the most useful HDSLRs out there)
 
I am a photographer by profession using Nikon equipment, last year tired of waiting I bought a 7D (which is not being in use) because I am waiting (too much) for a gh2. But to do a shoot out without the GH2 is ridiculous. It outclasses all the Canon in terms of pure image quality. It is truly what I would call the first 2nd generation DSLR video camera. Where you don't have to care about moire, aliasing, over heating, true hd resolution, etc, etc... and it is not included in the list. I am tired about the hype machine, so because a lot of people are using the Canon that mean that it is better. When the next Canon (technology) will come out I will understand, but serving us the same again and again.
 
Danielvilliers said:
But to do a shoot out without the GH2 is ridiculous. It outclasses all the Canon in terms of pure image quality. It is truly what I would call the first 2nd generation DSLR video camera. Where you don't have to care about moire, aliasing, over heating, true hd resolution, etc, etc... and it is not included in the list.
Click to expand...

Yes, but the AF100 has all that good stuff too and will be in the competition. Panasonic is not being blacklisted here.
 
You do still have to care about moire and aliasing, as the OLPF is tuned for the full still image resolution on the GH2. (unless you shoot in the crop mode which then you are effectively shooting with a smaller sensor). It's going to be no different than what the GH1 would be exposed to as well given they are optimized as a still camera first. Further, I've seen nothing to suggest that the GH2 is fullHD resolution either. In fact, I would put money on it that it doesn't resolve to true 1080p resolution. The GH2 does not replace the low light sensitivity of the 5D, nor the FoV or DoF capability it represents. Sure, I believe it outshines in many areas, but the 5D also has great benefits, as stated.
 
Maybe it's because it's seen more as a consumer product, rather than a pro one. Pro stuff just gets extra credit for being expensive, and not necessarily better performance, imo.

Rick Burnett said:
... Further, I've seen nothing to suggest that the GH2 is fullHD resolution either...
Click to expand...

Even in 24p? The stuff that I've seen in 24p is literally the clearest and most detailed footage I've ever seen (from a video camera).

*this is speculation* It probably resolves more than 960x540 (half HD), which results in minor aliasing. The AF100 probably resolves just about 960x540 so that aliasing is not present at all, which would make the GH2 seem sharper and more detailed.
 
Matthew P said:
Maybe it's because it's seen more as a consumer product, rather than a pro one. Pro stuff just gets extra credit for being expensive, and not necessarily better performance, imo.



Even in 24p? The stuff that I've seen in 24p is literally the clearest and most detailed footage I've ever seen (from a video camera).

*this is speculation* It probably resolves more than 960x540 (half HD), which results in minor aliasing. The AF100 probably resolves just about 960x540 so that aliasing is not present at all, which would make the GH2 seem sharper and more detailed.
Click to expand...

My experience with pro equipment is that there is a huge range of what 'pro equipment' tends to be and that pricing is not always linear with regards to that extra little bit of capability or quality. If I thought the GH2 would have been a better solution than the AF100 I would have bought one, but I didn't, and still don't from what I have seen. Granted, the GH2 has features I really like and wish the AF100 had (like zoom for focus), it doesn't negate the fact that the AF100 has a lot more features that I wanted.

What does framerate have to do with resolution?

The tests I have read and seen so far suggest the AF100 is between 700-800 lines of resolution. I have not done the tests myself.
 
Rick Burnett said:
...Further, I've seen nothing to suggest that the GH2 is fullHD resolution either. In fact, I would put money on it that it doesn't resolve to true 1080p resolution.....
Click to expand...
I think you're wrong here. Let's say for kicks that this statement is true...then almost all prosumer camcorders on the market fits in this category. You're not going to find many cameras that REALLY resolves that high for under $10,000 (IMO). Even then...HDMI capture on the GH-2 goes even farther than it's own AVCHD in terms of resolving detail. I have not done any tests myself....but the difference when viewed in some of the recent samples is striking.

The tests I have read and seen so far suggest the AF100 is between 700-800 lines of resolution. I have not done the tests myself.
Click to expand...
From what I've read from some in this forum....so does the GH-2. But I guess this is where folks like Barry can lend us a hand.
 
I don't think any technical aspect made Zacuto ignore the GH2 - doesn't make slightest sense. Also I don't think their shootout is as altruistic as they may 'sell' it, which is totally ok as they still are a company with certain interests.
If I wanted to be mean I'd say one of these interests may have excluded the GH2 - if they really did so.
 
If Zacuto and/or Mr. Robert Primes ASC thought it was valuable/useful for their intended audience to include a camera such as the Nikon D7000 in the new 2011 version of their Great Camera Shootout, then surely including a GH2 would have been just as (or even more) valuable/useful.

That's why it's so bizarre to me that the GH2 is not mentioned in Steve Weiss' post referenced at the beginning of this thread.

Either it's a typo -- an inadvertent omission from his post -- and the GH2 will indeed be included in the test, or, or, or ... ???

I can't think of _any_ "good" reason not to include a GH2 in such a test, especially since the GH2 is known to offer many, many useful features for filmmakers, especially given its relatively low price.

Sure, most of us can imagine many funny/wise-*ss or uncomplimentary reasons why the GH2 isn't on Steve's list, but I can't think of any good reasons.

Giving Steve the benefit of the doubt, I'm hoping it's a typo. (But I kinda doubt it is.)

Carry on!
 
Ian-T said:
I think you're wrong here. Let's say for kicks that this statement is true...then almost all prosumer camcorders on the market fits in this category. You're not going to find many cameras that REALLY resolves that high for under $10,000 (IMO). Even then...HDMI capture on the GH-2 goes even farther than it's own AVCHD in terms of resolving detail. I have not done any tests myself....but the difference when viewed in some of the recent samples is striking.


From what I've read from some in this forum....so does the GH-2. But I guess this is where folks like Barry can lend us a hand.
Click to expand...

Well, I am not wrong. It does not resolve 1080 lines of resolution. Just because I can take a 320x240 image and blow it up to 1920x1080 image through hardware doesn't mean I all of a sudden have HD (and no, I am not implying that the GH2 is 240 lines of resolution, this is just a over example). Now, one could argue if you can resolve 720p detail then you are in fact HD, which that might be the case.

This is the problem when companies tell you their system records 1080p. You don't know what you are getting, which is the point of testing in the first place. It's possible the GH2 resolves the same as the AF100, but, because it doesn't have a tuned OLPF for the final destination, that image is going to have worse aliasing and moire. You have to fix this BEFORE you go into the sensor optically. If you fix it after, you are going to make the image softer to get the same level of aliasing/moire. This is especially true of bayer patterns as the point is to essentially diffuse the high spatial detail so it can be captured at a lower spatial frequency and look smoother. If you don't do this before the sensor, that information is lost and cannot be recovered.
 
GH-1 was an afterthought on the first series and so is the GH-2. I believe if they omitted the AF100 in this one they know there would have been an uproar in this (and other) community. Being that it is basically the first large format prosumer camcorder out there I think their hand was forced...in a way. (IMO)
 
Rick Burnett said:
Well, I am not wrong. It does not resolve 1080 lines of resolution. Just because I can take a 320x240 image and blow it up to 1920x1080 image through hardware doesn't mean I all of a sudden have HD (and no, I am not implying that the GH2 is 240 lines of resolution, this is just a over example). Now, one could argue if you can resolve 720p detail then you are in fact HD, which that might be the case.

This is the problem when companies tell you their system records 1080p. You don't know what you are getting, which is the point of testing in the first place. It's possible the GH2 resolves the same as the AF100, but, because it doesn't have a tuned OLPF for the final destination, that image is going to have worse aliasing and moire. You have to fix this BEFORE you go into the sensor optically. If you fix it after, you are going to make the image softer to get the same level of aliasing/moire. This is especially true of bayer patterns as the point is to essentially diffuse the high spatial detail so it can be captured at a lower spatial frequency and look smoother. If you don't do this before the sensor, that information is lost and cannot be recovered.
Click to expand...

It's all marketing terms for them when they claim "1080p". They are not entirely wrong though.. They don't say...."resolves 1080p"....but the size of the image it spits out is 1080p (albeit blown up in most cases). But this is true for most cameras out there....that was my point. I understand all about having a proper OLPF for the final image (tuned for stills and sacrificing video IQ etc.) but this line of cameras have it better than all the others when it comes to that. At least the lack of aliasing/moire, compared to all other DLSRs out there is much much better on the IQ allowing more "true" detail to pop through. Understanding that the sensor on the AF100 and GH-2 are not the same....it could very well be that in the end both cameras resolves about the same amount of detail. But...detail isn't everything. Admittedly there's a whole lot more the AF100 can do than ANY of these DSLRs.
 
Ian-T said:
GH-1 was an afterthought on the first series and so is the GH-2. I believe if they omitted the AF100 in this one they know there would have been an uproar in this (and other) community. Being that it is basically the first large format prosumer camcorder out there I think their hand was forced...in a way. (IMO)
Click to expand...

agreed, but wouldn't there be an equal uproar if GH2 is left out? People have been eagerly anticipating it, there's no way ignoring it being what it is, plus, having prize in mind, this would be one of the most interesting cams in the shootout.
Let's see, I think they might have really just forgotten to mention it?!
 
I think maybe they just went with a 4/3s camera like the AF100 and figured it would represent the whole category. That's also probably why they left out the 7D, T2i and 60D (too redundant). I'm just guessing here. You have to remember...a lot of folks were claiming the AF100 and the GH-2 had the same sensor early on. We all know now that it isn't true. But oh well.
 
Let me restate of course, I do agree that leaving the GH2 out is a strange omission to me. I actually don't understand why the 1D is in there. It's probably the WORST deal for the money in terms of IQ. I used one along with my 7D and I wouldn't have purchased the 1D even if it was only $500 more. It wasn't that much better to me in my tests in how I use the camera, and I DO NOT like a battery grip.

I left a comment about the GH2 over at RedUser for the Zacuto person to understand why people are so perplexed. Given shooting is already under way, I doubt it is going to change. I would have really liked to see an Epic and an F3 in there as well, but Jim didn't make it happen, and I don't know what the Sony story is. The cheapest camera is the D7000, and you'd think, given that I do agree the GH2 can really shine in this test for the cost, to me it makes more sense for Zacuto to include it and open up their products to people interested in the GH2.

Personally, I just think there is some strange negative persona with GH1/GH2 that they don't get considered more when they should. I have NEVER seen a GH1 or GH2 for sale in NC, nor have I seen ANYONE with one that I've worked with. I've seen almost ALL Canon cameras. Panasonic needs to hire a better marketing firm for their DSLR style cameras. I've already tried to get two local stores to carry them and neither have yet. I've been waiting for the Birger adapter before I bring in my AF100 for them to check out to try and get some more local Panasonic distribution.
 
AnthonyFlores on reduser said:
sanjin jukic on reduser said:
if you practice, test, learn and experiment then you would know later in post how to make a footage out of GH2 that can look better than many other xx times expensive 1080p cameras like an A**x*a, F35, etc,...
Click to expand...
sanjin, i love you man and you've been a big help to me and trust me i sooooooooooo admire your passion (especially for Leica!) but you really need to stop mentioning the GH2. PERIOD. I mean it and Im speaking as a friend ... Don't type those three letters again here on the forum.
Click to expand...
lolol!!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top