Is the gh2 the new low light high ISO DSLR king

roei z said:
basically you're right, storytelling wise it doesn't really matter. it's all bulls**t.but with theater screenings, film look and more professional result, right now the GH2 is worlds apart.i don't know about Digic5, what T4i, 5DIII (price?!) or other canon models will bring.by then will have GH3 with even higher specs, so the wheel will turn again.anyway, i use the trusty cheap vintage canon FD's on the GH2 and i'm 100% happy. i personally don't have any lens limit.
Click to expand...

At the risk of taking this thread off topic (and probably re-opening a can of worms), I feel there are a couple of important points I'd like to make here.
The way I understand it, the reason the GH2's video is superior to Canon's has less to do with some technical prowess on the part of Panasonic, and more to do with the shortsightedness of Canon.

DSLR cameras have to downsample the image during video recording. The ideal way of doing this is to take all of the information coming off the sensor (some of which are anywhere between 12-24 megapixels) and resample it down to 1080p or 720p in real-time. This is what the GH2's image processor does.
The problem is, that's not what Canon's digic4 chips do. Rather, the digic4 skips lines instead of resampling.
When paired with an 18megpixel sensor, the Digic4 ends up throwing away over 90% of the sensor data, then takes whatever is left and encodes it into H.264 in real time.
The end result is often less than 1080p, and requires some upconverting which results in a softer image. On top of that, the missing information between pixels can cause severe moire on patterns. All of this could have been avoided had the Digic4 been designed to resample the entire sensor down instead.

Now, some have said that Canon chose line skipping because it produces a more desirable "look" to the frame, something that resembles film. I'm not so sure I understand or agree with that, and personally subscribe to the school of thought that the Digic4 is just too darned slow to resample while encoding video in real time. It sounds like Canon found a way to squeeze more life out of a nearly 4 year old processing chip, and the video quality suffered as a result.

Now that the Digic 5 chip is out, it promises 6x more processing power- more than enough to handle real-time downsampling of the image. In fact, frame-resampling for video is one of the advertised selling points of the 1Dx. If this trickles down to the Rebel and other cameras as it is rumored to in the next couple of months, it should really level the playing field.

Don't get me wrong, I love Panasonic, and the DVX100 is what started me here (like many of us). The GH2 is an excellent camera. I just don't think they did anything special to it to to achieve incredible video, but rather it looks amazing by default because of a glitch in the way Canon has been doing it.
And looks like Canon may have "fixed the glitch".
Therefore, I don't expect Panasonic to have some "GH3 with even higher specs, so the wheel will turn again". I don't think that theoretical wheel works that way. Rather, I expect the two lines of video DSLR to be neck-to-neck from here on out.

Meanwhile, I'd just like to point out the irony in calling Canon users fanboys. Phrases like "worlds apart", "light years ahead", etc, are all subjective. If you ask me, those are usually the terms found in association with fanboyism. ;)

I'm just messing with you. Everyone has a right to be a fan of the products they use, but I must point out that plenty of professionals are well aware of the GH2 and still choose to stick with Canon for whatever reason. Some people prefer the native photography lenses as well as the way Canons render color, despite the codec and line skipping limitations. Me? I prefer Magic Lantern's feature set. But I am not married to Canon at all, and have given Panasonic's GH line a serious consideration each time I buy a new camera.
Its not as clear-cut as you guys make it sound. If it were, there wouldn't be so many still using Canons.
 
Last edited:
it's indeed a can of worms. i know the specs about the canon low re-sampling.
i only used the "lightyears" words just the way I see it, so it came out a little off. sorry.
it's just my eyes and taste. never liked canon look, colors, and softness from day one. so on top off all that the hacked GH2 gives me plenty more.
(that is, at the moment. that Digit5 sounds refreshing).
i guess the masses that use canon mainly got used to it because it turned to be the "official" budget industry tool.
but that's ok with me. that way GH2 look shines out more ;)
 
Odd how these arguments and "points" all seem so like a car argument.
On one hand, you have the an overpower muscle car. Sounds great, looks great, seems great. But once you look inside, you see how wasteful, poorly thought out the car is.
On the other hand, you have a decent affordable car. And some guy decides to "after market" the car out, and turns it into a super rice rocket.
Both will get you great quality for its short lifespan, and both excel in various areas. But at the end of the day, both will be forgotten in a few years.
I guess the choice is, do you like to wear white beaters? or do you prefer shinny sneakers?
Adds nothing to the conversation really. Just wanted to rant a bit. ;)

On a more serious note, I love my GH2. With the new unlocks, I have more camera then I need...
With that said, I would like to see a new affordable Canon cameras. Im not as impressed with the new high end models as I wish I could be... but if that technology filters down to the other cameras, which it will. Ill be a fan boy.
 
well.. i guess we said all we needed to say ;)

i think it's a sign for me- once i tend to over think on pixel peeping,
it means i'm not really being creative at the moment.
 
Good points made all around. The car argument seems a bit disconnected, though- Are you comparing the GH2 or the Canon to the tricked out rice rocket? Because both are primarily stills cameras that produce decent video out the box, but get better with tricked out firmware hacks and tweaks. The argument really works in both directions- I'm not sure if I'd use a Canon for video without Magic Lantern, or the GH2 without the bitrate hacks.

Meanwhile, if the digic5 chip does not end up fixing the resolution and sampling problem on lower end DSLRs, I will likely sell my Canon gear and jump to the Panasonic side. Which leads me back to my first post in this thread- I'd wait and see what Canon does in a couple of months before deciding which new camera is worth your purchase.
 
Aren't there specific specs about Digic5?
I don't follow the canon news, but it seem vage, the way you talk about it..
 
roei z said:
Aren't there specific specs about Digic5?
I don't follow the canon news, but it seem vage, the way you talk about it..
Click to expand...

Well, there are some specific facts released by Canon, and then there are rumors.

The facts are:
The digic5 chip is out, already found in consumer cameras and multiple times faster than the Digic 4.
Canon has announced that the 1Dx will have extremely high quality video, with full frame resampling and a 4:2:2 codec complete with timecode (features traditionally reserved for full sized production work cameras). But this camera will cost somewhere around $7k.
Another fact- the 1Dx isn't using the normal digic5, but rather some enhanced mode digic5+. What the plus means is still somewhat of a mystery, AFAIK.

But now, the rumors:
The digic5 chip is fast enough to do resampling instead of line skipping, and all new Canon cameras will be resolving video this way from now on. Some question whether or not this is feature reserved for the "+" model, however I think it is more likely that the plus means higher end features not found in other DSLR models (like the 4:2:2 codec). Just how many of the 1Dx's features are reserved for the digic5+ remain to be seen.

The other rumor is that the Digic5 will show up in a low end affordable T4i as early as February. The Rebel Ti series, following its nearly annual release schedule, is usually launched somewhere around Q1, and since the Digic5 is now out and available in consumer models, there is very much reason to believe it is the new standard for all Canon cameras, leaving the Digic4 behind.

So basically, what is likely but still unconfirmed, is that there will be a T4i announcement in the next couple of months, that it will use the Digic5 chip, and that the Digic5 cameras will properly resample the video as described above.

If this is true, its worth waiting for in my opinion. Especially because I already own and enjoy some native Canon lenses for photography.

But some say that Canon wouldn't release a Rebel camera with a Digic5 that fixes the video glitch before a new 5D and/or 7D are out first. I'd like to think that Canon doesn't really care about what feature comes out first. The way I see it, the video frame re sampling is not a "new feature", but rather a fix for a glitch that plagued the old models. After all, the articulating screen and 3x zoom mode didn't seem to stop Canon from rolling those features out first.
 
roei z said:
....i guess the masses that use canon mainly got used to it because it turned to be the "official" budget industry tool...
Click to expand...
I don't think people "got used to it". They requested it and thus it became the budget industry tool. The soft buttery look of the Canon DSLR's is very unique and in stark contrast to the overly sharpened look of virtually everything coming from the GH2's.

I was one who suggested that Canon have this look by virtue of the way they do their processing. I'm not sure it is on purpose and specifically chosen for that look, but it has become their trademark trait and the one people turn to over and over because it is appealing to watch.

Back to the original topic, the lowlight capability of the hacked GH2's is astounding. It's not noise free, but consitant color in the noise. The Canon's fall down hard due to random color shift in the noise, that is virtually impossible to work with in post. For low light wildlife work that I'm into this combo could be the ultimate with vintage manual primes.

Cheers,
Pete
 
Last edited:
I think that the hack gh2 shot are more than decent, seeing the driftwood intra codec has to be seen to be believed. I dare to say that it is best below $ 10 000 without and external recorder. Many have been inter cutting it with red footage on personal view, at least in 1080p it held very well. I just hope that the intra codec Canon has said is as good as it. For now the 1dx is a given and I hope that this tech filters down. But, it will need a complete sensor and image processor cycle from Canon lines. So I am 90% sure that you will see it more in a 5d mark3, then in a Canon 7d mark2 and then finally in the lower end $ 1000 and below line. So it might be more reasonable to see the Digic 5 allied to a new video optimised sensor at the $ 1000 price range at least for another 12 to 24 month. It might seem long but how many have predicted a 5d mark3 in 2010. We are at the end of 2011 and still nothing.

As a Nikon shooter, who has bought a 7d and now a GH2. I hope that nikon finally comes with a high quality video model, perhaps the strongly rumored D800. Now with the hack for the Nikon out, we might see the same result in the future Nikon cameras even if they come with more mundane specification like the 24 mbits avchd.

I wrote this tread here in the general dslr users forum more to share than any defiance. I am fed up with the fan boys and their bias (not talking on any one here, think that this thread is more than ok). Unfortunately usually they reach their goal as their persistence makes people think that either X brand is better or Y one. Tech is always evolving and one just supersede each other with new model. For me the hacked gh2 is the true dslr 2.0 because it cures 90% of problem associated with the first wave of HDslr. If someone cannot do good images with it, he won't be able with any other camera.

I thought that the gh2 would not be able to compete in low light against the larger sensor ones even with the hack, but the latest example are telling me otherwise, that is why I put this thread here. Just want to share. If anyone wants a truly affordable remarkable camera, they have it in the hack gh2. No need to wait for next gen etc. just buy it put some adapter on it and use your lens. When the next next gen comes from your brand and that it is better just sell the body. The hacked gh2 has even put me at rest with Nikon, because I have been so frustrated on their video side when they have no video line to protect. But now I don't have to wait for anything because I have my large sensor camera. It looks and hold as a toy compared to my Nikon but it produces so nice image, many times I have been zooming into frame grabs in Photoshop because I was thinking that they were photographs.
 
Last edited:
gonzo_entertainment said:
And in my thinking... why would you even ever need it? I've had my 5D for a year now and have never shot video at over 1250, rarely do I go above 640.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Just because a camera can go that high in its ISO settings doesn't mean much to me. Film cameras can't see nearly that good in the dark....but that has not stopped people from shooting film.
 
Im in the same boat, not sure about the "complete" specs. However, aside from the bugs/limitations associated with the current lineup of Canon cameras: Pixel skipping, HDMI output, higher/lower compression, etc...
Aside from these all being addressed, its up to Canon how they want to implement the full capacity of the new processor into the lower end models.
Basically, the higher bit rate, lower light, and HDMI output. Pretty sure Canon wont be pushing anything higher then 1080p, but you should see dramatic improvements in the video quality and lowlight abilities in the new cameras.
This is based off of what the Canon EOS-1D X has introduced. Question is, how close will they get to their flag ship camera? Hopefully, a lot of the full video capacity will be implemented into the lower models... after all the 1Dx is a photo moster first, then a video machine.
 
Ian-T said:
Do you mean for stills? Or for video? I ask because there is a difference.
Click to expand...

No, there isn't a difference in the sense that a 28mm still camera lens doesn't have a 28mm field of view on a crop sensor camera no matter what mode you're in. My intent from day 1 has been to shoot on vintage still lenses so any crop sensor camera created issues at the wide end of the spectrum. If I could afford cinema glass I wouldn't be shooting on a DSLR. I also come from a film photography background so I didn't want to screw with the way my brain thinks of focal lengths.
 
A bit out of subject. Some sometime argue that the gh2 is not cinematic or lack of dof etc. i saw this little video this afternoon

 
gonzo_entertainment said:
No, there isn't a difference in the sense that a 28mm still camera lens doesn't have a 28mm field of view on a crop sensor camera no matter what mode you're in. My intent from day 1 has been to shoot on vintage still lenses so any crop sensor camera created issues at the wide end of the spectrum. If I could afford cinema glass I wouldn't be shooting on a DSLR. I also come from a film photography background so I didn't want to screw with the way my brain thinks of focal lengths.
Click to expand...

Motion picture focal lengths don't correspond to full frame photography either. APS-C is the closest to S35.
 
hendosan said:
Motion picture focal lengths don't correspond to full frame photography either. APS-C is the closest to S35.
Click to expand...

Right, I know, but I'm using still photo lenses. Like I said, to get wide on a crop sensor you either have to use modern glass or pay a very high price for vintage glass in the 10mm to 18 mm range. If I could afford to shoot on cinema glass I wouldn't be shooting on a DSLR.
 
Last edited:
I do not have a GH2 right now, but I have been looking at getting one for months. In my opinion, it's either a hacked GH2 or a 5D, the in-betweens don't make the cut because of the image they output or not enough "special advantages" on the list. The MKii has a moire filter correction option and the massive sensor, which helps tremendously when shooting in tight locations.

The GH2's image, with or without the hack, is incredible especially at it's price and reigns--in IQ, over all other DSLRs. If you've not seen GH2 and 5D projected, the difference is pretty crazy. The problems for me are two fold: smaller sensor (wide and fast lenses are expensive), then the baked-in curves of each picture profile. The highlights are typically unpleasant and the camera crushes the low range mids too far and too fast.

I would be willing to look past the sensor crop if the hack allowed you to tear into the picture profiles and find something that's a lot less crushed and a lot less likely to lose highlights so quickly.

We do have a 5D, once more, however. It's just more popular for one, and again... the crushed nature of GH-2 footage bugs me out of the decision every time I go to find one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top