GH2 Just got a GH2! This camera is just R-I-D-I-C-U-L-O-U-S !!

A

Adamsenoj

Well-known member
I just got a GH2. Picked it up today at the store. First impression I had is it's tiny!!! I thought it was much larger. I have seen Philip Bloom calling the NX5 a lens cap. Well, the GH2 is not much better. :)
This thing would look absolutely ridiculous hanging from a PL lens, let alone an Angenieux zoom.
Compared to the 5D and 7D it feels very flimsy and not as well built. The buttons are all hard to operate because they are so small. Let's hope the image quality will make up for all of this. I just can't see how some people may prefer to shoot with this over for example the AF100 if you can afford the AF100. I can see this is a pain in the butt to shoot with.


With that out of the way, I was really looking forward to shooting some video with it after all the fantastic looking footage I seen online. I have to say this camera is absolutely ridiculous!! Totally! How can this cheap little thing make such fantastic images? I have just turned it on and shot some video with it outside and I can already see what the hype is all about. My jaw is on the floor, really. I'm looking forward to testing the hacks.

Just a question. Is there an equivalent to Barry's book for the Gh2? Is this it? http://www.eoshd.com/gh2-guide-book

Is this book worth your time and money? I'm hoping it's focused on the video side only of the GH2?

I also found another book or is it a video? It's called PANASONIC GH2 GUIDEBOOK but seems to be a video?

http://www.callboxlive.com/products/panasonic-gh2-guidebook

So what's better, the EOSHD book or the Callbox one?

Thanks.
 
Hi. It looks ridiculous only because you're not used to it. Unless you're under the influence of the american "bigger is always better" moto, I think the small size and compactness of this lovely camera is a mervellous thing! Doesn't get in the way, doesn't take much space and it's easy to carry around. Also, my fingers are normal sized and I don't find it hard to operate, it's nice.

You are right, the footage it gives for the price is stunning. Now, go to the personal-view forum and hack it asap. Prepare for a 2nd, bigger, jaw drop.

I have the eoshd and I would recomend it if you're not a pro videographer, or if you want to have a central source that will walk you through. I'd prefer it over the callbox one.

Have fun!
 
Sorry if I gave the wrong vibe. The ridiculous comment was not for the size. It was for how good the image looks compared to the price of the camera. It was actually a compliment, believe it or not. :)
 
In a year you will posting... The image from my GH2 just doesn't cut it any more, which of the latest cameras should I choose.

I have stuff shot with a $60K + camera, which at the time was state of the art, which I look at now and go... what crap!
 
David W. Jones said:
In a year you will posting... The image from my GH2 just doesn't cut it any more, which of the latest cameras should I choose.

I have stuff shot with a $60K + camera, which at the time was state of the art, which I look at now and go... what crap!
Click to expand...

Oh, believe me, I know that. I came from Digibeta and today I look at stuff I shot on an EX3 and it looks much better.
 
Just came back from another quick test. My observations so far:

* The images are sharp! What else can I say. Definitely much sharper than the Canons.

*The dynamic range is much, much better than I expected after reading so many times that the GH2's dynamic range was not great. I had no problem in properly exposing somebody under a tree shade and still keeping some blue color on the clear sky behind. Inside, I exposed to the exterior through the window and the detail inside was pretty good with only a normal bulb on. I would say that from memory, the dynamic range seems better than a Canon 7D. Maybe even the 5D. Definitely more than usable dynamic range so I really can't see what people complain about. The AF100 is said to be even better so I'm curious to test it.

* The loss in the wide angle sucks a little bit. I'm not sure I could put up with the even bigger loss in the BMC.

*Pretty cumbersome to operate handheld. Definitely needs a rig. The small buttons and controls plus touch screen functions don't make it any easier.


My general conclusion after some very superficial testing is that it's a great camera, specially when you consider the price. As a stills cameras my impression is that although it doesn't hold a candle to the 5D, it's not much worse if at all than a 7D. But as a video camera it seems to be much better than both. I honestly don't see how Panasonic can improve over this with a GH3 without badly shooting their professional division in the foot.
 
lpowell said:
I don't think many of us read books, we have this thing called the "internet" ;-)
Click to expand...

Sure, but it's nice to get it all or the bulk of it from a single source rather than bounce around the internet to put it together. For those who don't have much time and are too busy shooting, investing in a book or DVD is the best way to go.
 
TheDingo said:
Use M4/3 lenses ( 7-14mm zoom, 12mm f/2.0, 14mm f/2.5, 17mm f/0.95 ) and you have lots of wide-angle lenses to choose from.
Click to expand...

Sure. But even at 14mm that gives you "only" the same AOV of a 18mm in super 35, which is wide but not extra wide. Besides I'm pretty well invested in glass already and investing in M4/3 is not really interesting for me.
The reason I decided going with M4/3 is exactly because you can pretty much use any lens mount with it. Although I may be obligated to get at least one wider lens. As it stands now the CP 18mm is my widest lens. So a 14mm could at least give me back my 18mm super 35 AOV.

What wider than 18mm primes, new or old, do people recommend? Doesn't need to be Lumix ones. Can be anything from Canon, to Nikon to any lens, as long as it's sharp and of decent speed, at least F3.0.
 
Last edited:
Adamsenoj said:
Sure. But even at 14mm that gives you "only" the same AOV of a 18mm in super 35, which is wide but not extra wide.
Click to expand...

Actually an 18mm lens on a Canon APS-C sensor camera ( like the 7D ) has about the same AOV as a 15.5mm lens with the GH2 sensor. ( the factor between these two formats is 1.14x )

Coming from the GH2 perspective the 14mm lens would match the AOV of a 16mm lens on an APS-C Canon camera. ( a 12mm lens on the GH2 would match a 14mm lens on the 7D )

So the difference is not huge, and yes M4/3 cameras require M4/3 lenses if you want to get the most out of them.
 
Problem is company like Tokina, Sigma need to start making their lenses in Micro 4/3, that would solve all of the problems. I can't even imagine having the lovely tokina 11-16mm working natively with the camera..... I just bought the 14mm pancake lens and I can't deal with this thing. Images are sharp but WAY to small to get a grip and manual focus how I'm accustomed too.

Looks like I might be selling it or sending it back ..... Image is nice and sharp but just not for me physical wise.
 
TheDingo said:
Actually an 18mm lens on a Canon APS-C sensor camera ( like the 7D ) has about the same AOV as a 15.5mm lens with the GH2 sensor. ( the factor between these two formats is 1.14x )
Click to expand...

I don't think APS-C should be the standard as to which this is measured. Super 35 is the modern 35mm motion picture standard. But I stand corrected anyhow. To get the same AOV a 18mm gives me in super 35 with a M4/3 I need an even wider lens than 14mm. I need a 12.7mm.

TheDingo said:
Coming from the GH2 perspective the 14mm lens would match the AOV of a 16mm lens on an APS-C Canon camera. ( a 12mm lens on the GH2 would match a 14mm lens on the 7D )
Click to expand...

I used the Abelcine calculator, which only lists the AF100. So the AF100 and GH2 have diffente factors even though they are both M4/3 and many say they share the same sensor?

TheDingo said:
So the difference is not huge, and yes M4/3 cameras require M4/3 lenses if you want to get the most out of them.
Click to expand...

I hope you mean get the most out of it concerning wide angle and not image quality.
 
J.F.R. said:
Problem is company like Tokina, Sigma need to start making their lenses in Micro 4/3, that would solve all of the problems. I can't even imagine having the lovely tokina 11-16mm working natively with the camera.....
Click to expand...

Can the GH2 control the lens? If so, what advantage is there in having a native M4/3 version besides not needing an adapter?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top