More Heads Explode! GH2 & GH1 shoot DSC Labs Chart!

[dvbrother]

When you shoot test charts, sometimes you learn things that aren't directly related to the charts.
Here's one thing I learned today: when you shoot charts, you're supposed to expose for the brightest chip set to clip (overexpose). I always thought you exposed the middle-gray chip (the one in the middle) to be set at 55 IRE on a waveform monitor. After all, this is how you properly expose a gray card. Apparently this isn't how it's done, as the DSC Labs instructions say otherwise. So, it turns out I've been doing it wrong for a long time.

Another thing I learned about the GH2 doing this test. The "Multiple" metering mode can bite you in the a** when shooting charts, and "Center-Weighted" is preferable. I didn't always fill the frame with the chart, and left a little black around the edges. Well, that little black around the edges "tricks" Multiple Meter mode into telling you to underexpose by 1/3 stop. For my own personal workflow, I'll use "Center-Weighted" metering from now on.

Anyway, I have some stills to post from footage I shot with the GH1 and GH2. These are just a small portion of many tests that I did. I may post those other results later. But here's what I found in a nutshell:
The 24mb 1080 24p is sharper than the 17mb 1080i. This may seem obvious, but the difference is striking. It looks like the GH2's 1080 24p is noticeably sharper than the GH1.
Also, I compared the Lumix 20mm f1.7 to the 14-140mm kit lens at the same aperture (f6.3) and found the 20mm to be sharper. Again, not surprising. What's interesting is that the kit lens seems to be 1/3 stop slower than the 20mm when set to the same aperture.

All shots are on Smooth setting with Sharpness at minus 2. Contrast, Color and NR are at 0. ISO 400.

GH2 Lumix 20mm @f6.3

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5009/5315168682_8d3a91bdb5_o.jpg

GH2 Lumix 14-140mm, set to 20mm @f6.3

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5123/5314572209_729cf2216c_o.jpg

GH2 1080i

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5087/5314573703_15c7d40325_o.jpg

GH1 1080i

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5245/5314575311_34622edced_o.jpg

Lastly, just to illustrate how important the glass is when judging image quality, contrast and color fidelity, look at the quad photo using the 20mm and three different 50mm lenses...a Canon FD f1.2, an Olympus Zuiko OM f1.8, and a c-mount Cosmicar f1.9. BTW, the Zuiko looks soft because it's wide open at f1.8. Also, if you look closely, you'll see the Canon has red/blue chromatic aberration. But the point is they all have different color casts even though they were all shot with the same white balance under the same lighting. I guess this is why it's important to have a matching set of lenses when shooting a film.

And a bonus photo: this is shot with the "Intelligent Resolution" set to "High". Notice the added white outlines around the text on the chart. That's not there in real life. It basically sharpens the image, which probably isn't good if you want a cinematic look.


http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5247/5315170140_83d1995bef_o.jpg


I did some tests regarding white balance settings and the dynamic range of different film modes, but I'll post them later. I may reshoot the charts and shoot some real-world footage. Hope these photos are informative.

 

[Dazza]

Any chance of uploding the pictures so they are in full resolution, the attachments seem to be downrezzed. I really like looking at the colour differences between the different lens, very interesting.

Aperture values have always been like that, only one factor in what determines the actual light you get to the sensor, thus why T stops are used in cinematography.

 

[dvbrother]

I don't know how to upload them to DVXUser in full resolution. If you follow the Flickr link I included above the first picture, you can eventually view the 1920x1080 originals. that's the best I can do for now unless someone can tell me how to upload full res pics here.

 

[Ben_B]

I don't know how to upload them to DVXUser in full resolution. If you follow the Flickr link I included above the first picture, you can eventually view the 1920x1080 originals. that's the best I can do for now unless someone can tell me how to upload full res pics here.

On flickr go to the original file, right click and copy the image URL, and then past that url in IMAGE tags on here. Click the image button on the formatting bar to get these tags.

 

[Dazza]

Oh Thanks, didn't notice the flicker link.

There is quite a bit more resolution on the GH2, and the 24P mode is insanely sharp

 

[dvbrother]

Thanks Ben.

I updated my first post to have links to the 1920x1080 files. Hopefully this is much easier. The tell-tale sign for me is on the clarity of the text on the chart.
The GH2's resolution is really impressive.

 

[Ian-T]

I really like the grain of the GH-2. As I've mentioned before...the GH-1's image is "smoothed over" like there is some sort of noise reduction going on. As nice as it is been the GH-2 is even nicer.

 

[dvbrother]

I really like the grain of the GH-2. As I've mentioned before...the GH-1's image is "smoothed over" like there is some sort of noise reduction going on. As nice as it is been the GH-2 is even nicer.

I agree. I haven't shot much with it yet as I've only had it for a week and have been busy, but the few things I've shot seem even more like film than the GH1 did. The grain structure seems to be part of it. On ETC mode, the grains are a bit larger and in some ways it even looks better. I think skin tones look much smoother and realistic on the Gh2. I can't wait to get out there and shoot some real footage.

 

[Sage]

I really like the grain of the GH-2. As I've mentioned before...the GH-1's image is "smoothed over" like there is some sort of noise reduction going on. As nice as it is been the GH-2 is even nicer.

I doubly agree!