GH2 New A-cameras to match GH2...

To the OP, you mentioned shooting events. Are these live events? I also happen to love my GH2 and before that GH1 and have some amazing handheld footage from them but for live events sometimes I do miss the use of a steady servo zoom lens and using a camera designed for those types of situations. There is definitely an advantage to at least having a high quality video camera around. Use the best tools for the job I always say. I recently sold my HMC-40 because my GH1 and GH2 spanked it in low light. Even with slow lenses. The higher end Panasonic video cameras are however much better in low light and have one heck of a servo zoom lens on them. Most video cameras are sharper DSLR's and I wouldn't worry too much about it. Never trust the web for video sharpness. If you found some material that looked detailed then you know it can do it.

Obviously a 1/2" HD video camera would be best such as the EX1 but some of the newer generation 1/3" video cameras can be almost as good. There have been a lot of technology advances to make 1/3" perform closer to 1/2". Honestly I don't see the return on investment myself but if you make money from clients they really make sense. A darn good 1/3" or 1/2" will beat a GH2 in low light except for f1.8 or faster lenses which of course just do not exist in a zoom.

Of course there are many other advantages to a pro video camera such as True HDMI or HD-SDI output which in some production environments may be required. They really open up a whole new world of possibilities in what you can produce and work on. Not to mention audio which on a pro video camera you can without a doubt record directly onto with top quality. A good video camera will not skimp on audio. This was one of my biggest gripes with my GH1 at first and the reason why every shoot also had the HMC-40 shooting although its audio isn't exactly the best either.

For what you will pay for a GH3 + 12-35 + 35-100 you can buy a darn good video camera that may be just as good in low light and a million times more flexible.
 
First off, this thread has been epic. No worry on jacking it.

Flinty, everyone needs to be able to take criticism on the chin. I've turned out mediocre stuff at certain points too, but I don't blame my gear. That is what everyone is getting at. Only a few things are possible..

1. You loaded a bad hack. Certain hacks were unstable and caused all sorts of artifacts in the beginning.
2. You filmed a pattern (that roof) that happened to hit the compression at just the right point to cause moire patterns like crazy.. I discovered the limits of the GH2 pre-hack by filming a swimming event. The codec started breaking up and I wondered if it was a faulty card, then discovered the hack with great rejoicing! So tell us if you hacked your cam or not.
3. You goofed.

I truly love the GH2 and will likely getting a GH3 due to the upgrades and my love for the current footage I'm pulling out of it. It is by far one of the best sub $5k cameras ever to reach the market. I'd opt for a GH3 over an updated AF100 due to the form factors and price point. I could get another lens for the price of ND filters and XLR inputs, and a lower bitrate.

Regarding formats... I do love 4/3. Currently have the 35-175 X lens with servo zoom, 20mm pancake and the 14-140. Trying to decide what to grab next, too many great choices. Even the BMCC has a m43 mount!

Thank you for weighing in and confirming my suspicions. I am just a happy GH2 user.
 
flinty said:
Gary i want any advice,but if the footage is like that on the raw files as shown when on direct replay from the camera you are saying deinterlacing would cure the edited footage.As i have said 24P is the same,thanks
Click to expand...

Did it ever occur to you that perhaps you have a defective camera? I get it you are upset and it is natural to blame the gear. Especially when other gear seems to work fine and you have done this for many years.

The fact is however that a lot of people and I mean a lot have amazing results and nothing but good things to say about the GH2. Why is that? I think what upsets a lot of people with you is your refusal to accept that other people get great results from the GH2. Five minutes on vimeo or this site will show you what can be done with the GH2. You just cannot claim an entire camera line is defective because you have one bad copy. Do you honestly feel all of us are so disillusioned and clueless that we enjoy using a piece of junk camera? Many of us are some darn picky and critical users and wouldn't just settle for any camera.

I'm sorry you got stiffed with a lemon and now have a personal grudge against the cameras. The thing that confuses me however is if you refuse to use the piece of junk then why do you spend so much time on this site focused on the GH2? If you have moved on to a "better" camera then seriously move on. The nature of your attitude is just asking for the kind of reaction you are receiving. Yes your footage sucks. Not sure why but it does. What I do know is that there are countless thousands of samples around the Internet that do not look like that. Please explain why that is.
 
HotConductor said:
First off, this thread has been epic. No worry on jacking it.

Flinty, everyone needs to be able to take criticism on the chin. I've turned out mediocre stuff at certain points too, but I don't blame my gear. That is what everyone is getting at. Only a few things are possible..

1. You loaded a bad hack. Certain hacks were unstable and caused all sorts of artifacts in the beginning.
2. You filmed a pattern (that roof) that happened to hit the compression at just the right point to cause moire patterns like crazy.. I discovered the limits of the GH2 pre-hack by filming a swimming event. The codec started breaking up and I wondered if it was a faulty card, then discovered the hack with great rejoicing! So tell us if you hacked your cam or not.
3. You goofed.

I truly love the GH2 and will likely getting a GH3 due to the upgrades and my love for the current footage I'm pulling out of it. It is by far one of the best sub $5k cameras ever to reach the market. I'd opt for a GH3 over an updated AF100 due to the form factors and price point. I could get another lens for the price of ND filters and XLR inputs, and a lower bitrate.

Regarding formats... I do love 4/3. Currently have the 35-175 X lens with servo zoom, 20mm pancake and the 14-140. Trying to decide what to grab next, too many great choices. Even the BMCC has a m43 mount!

Thank you for weighing in and confirming my suspicions. I am just a happy GH2 user.
Click to expand...


Mine has no hack,as i have said i get that effect on all similar places,i get good footage with a tripod and Thomas Smet i suspect my GH has a defect and i have no grudge against the camera and in over 2 year have made hours of footage but it is tiresome with a heavy tripod.What i know is i am not the only one to have had problems and give criticism of some sort,i think its pointless sending my camera to the uk shop pana use for repair as i think it would come back unsolved,i cant sell it if as everyone agrees the footage sucks.


Edit post i have just tested my 14 and 20mm pancakes which to be fair i have only used in low light and the M & A is much better than all my zoom lenses,this cant be the whole answer as many who say they dont get what i get are using zoom lenses but its a thought.
 
Last edited:
I don't understand what you mean by "tiresome with a heavy tripod". The GH2 is one of the lightest cameras out there. It looks like a toy, shoots like an Arri. Personally, I do not think your camera is faulty. The footage of the roof with the moire issues can be easily replicated. There are certain patterns that are very difficult to work around. 5Dmkii has the same issues on certain patterns.
 
HotConductor said:
I don't understand what you mean by "tiresome with a heavy tripod". The GH2 is one of the lightest cameras out there. It looks like a toy, shoots like an Arri. Personally, I do not think your camera is faulty. The footage of the roof with the moire issues can be easily replicated. There are certain patterns that are very difficult to work around. 5Dmkii has the same issues on certain patterns.
Click to expand...


Carrying my heavy tripod around is what i mean by tiresome.It can also get tiresome when most say they dont get the problems i get,i have said i now find using fixed pancake lenses the footage is better than with lumix zoom lenses so possibly the problem is with my lenses.
You say[Personally, I do not think your camera is faulty. The footage of the roof with the moire issues can be easily replicated. There are certain patterns that are very difficult to work around. 5Dmkii has the same issues on certain patterns.]others say they get no m @ a problems so it is confusing.
 
flinty if you really want some help you need to post a problem file straight from the sd card so that we can see what you're seeing and try interpret it correctly - this has been requested a few times and you still haven't done it yet
the gh2 is not completely immune from moire or aliasing but its no where near the problem that you are reporting or as bad as the 5d2 for that matter
 
Last edited:
Back on topic ... @Hotconductor, have you considered an HMC-40 as a cheap interim solution? Frame rate options and colors are a very good match to GH2. It's cheap, very sharp, portable and much better rolling shutter than a GH2. Downsides are poor lowlight sensitivity and lack of DOF-control given the small sensor.
 
Flinty you say you use a heavy tripod but your footage of the pub/hotel is neither steady or level - maybe there's a problem with that also. You just need a good pod with a good head - Velbon, Miller, Sachtler - what have you got ?? Movement will accentuate moire.
 
GrahamH said:
Back on topic ... @Hotconductor, have you considered an HMC-40 as a cheap interim solution? Frame rate options and colors are a very good match to GH2. It's cheap, very sharp, portable and much better rolling shutter than a GH2. Downsides are poor lowlight sensitivity and lack of DOF-control given the small sensor.
Click to expand...

Actually I was NOT considering that as an option, but will put it on the table. With a GH3 I atleast get several upgrades and the ability to continue within the M43 glass family. I just sold my two HMC150s this past year, so it would be a strange thing to pickup an HMC40. My real worry is that it wouldn't be a true upgrade, so I would be stuck with a cam that would be difficult to sell further down the road. Unlike an AC160. Thoughts?
 
HotConductor said:
My real worry is that it wouldn't be a true upgrade, so I would be stuck with a cam that would be difficult to sell further down the road. Unlike an AC160. Thoughts?
Click to expand...

I think any fixed lens camcorder will be difficult to see further down the road, personally. I just see the prices dropping even further as the market starts to become saturated with desirable large sensor camcorders. Which is a shame, because fixed-lens cameras still have a place.

Unless you absolutely need SDI and LPCM audio, I'd look at the AC130 is the price differential makes sense to you.
 
SDI is great for live broadcasting, but otherwise you are right. The 22x lens is great on the AC160, and the image quality itself is great. The HMC40 seems like a decent camera, just a step down from the GH2 visually.

I think this has really helped me makeup my mind. GH3 it is, unless Panny releases some awesome 4k/GH3/HMC hybrid do-it-all camera.

I appreciate your feedback. Those of us who actually film with our cameras (instead of comparing specs and debating Canon vs Panny vs RED) try to make gear last as long as possible. I can see my GH2s last a very long time. A GH3 with its small but meaningful improvements, seems like the logical step for me..
 
malibudutchie said:
Flinty you say you use a heavy tripod but your footage of the pub/hotel is neither steady or level - maybe there's a problem with that also. You just need a good pod with a good head - Velbon, Miller, Sachtler - what have you got ?? Movement will accentuate moire.
Click to expand...


Of course that was not tripod footage,i have been saying i get good tripod footage read the pages,i use a good velbon but there are times when i dont want to carry it around,sometimes miles,and even brace footage is not to a good standard but its not my filming but my GH2 has to be rock steady using zoom lenses. Sorry wish i had not mentioned this problem on this thread.
 
flinty said:
Of course that was not tripod footage,i have been saying i get good tripod footage read the pages,i use a good velbon but there are times when i dont want to carry it around,sometimes miles,and even brace footage is not to a good standard but its not my filming but my GH2 has to be rock steady using zoom lenses. Sorry wish i had not mentioned this problem on this thread.
Click to expand...

You did mention it Flinty, but I think many users here glossed over it because it didn't make sense to them. Footage that exhibits severe moire and aliasing would still appear with or without a tripod. But you are correct in that it doesn't belong in this thread- we'd be happy to discuss the merits or faults of your observations in another thread if you'd like.
 
HotConductor said:
The HMC40 seems like a decent camera, just a step down from the GH2 visually.
Click to expand...

Hey I am fine with whatever you choose. But for event work I wouldn't necessarily agree the HMC40 is a step down: it's plenty sharp (native 1080 sensor, unlike the HMC150) and its minimal rolling shutter is a big plus for run-and-gun.

And as for losing value - it has lost most of it already! You can pick up a clean HMC40 off EBay today for $400-$500 less than a GH3 body! Like I said, for some folk it could be a good interim choice to buy time ...
 
FWIW- the lumix g x zooms apply sharpening internally. They moire more than some simpler less sophisticated lenses. I discovered this a few weeks ago shooting in a lab where there were computer monitors in frame. My lumix g 12-35 2.8 was making crazy and unacceptable patterns on the screens, then I switched out to an all- manual lens, i think my voigtlander 25 .95 or maybe my canon fd mount 50mm 1.4, and the problem went away. Presto. I don't remember which manual lens it was, but it was definitely manual and the problem definitely went away. On what lens was that problematic roof footage shot on?

-EDIT:
I spoke to a Panasonic tech today about this moire issue, and he corrected me that the lumix G zooms don't actually apply sharpening internally. Oops. He explained to me that when you're getting moire, it's often because the lens you're using is capable of resolving to a higher resolution that your sensor is. The sensor in the Gh2 and gh3 apply a low-pass resolution filter to the image to get rid of artifacts like moire. What that does is cut off the resolution above a certain fixed point so that you sensor won't get confused (i.e. moire) when there's finer data coming at it than it can handle, like very thin contrasty lines between roof tiles. This could explains why the computer screens cleaned up when I switched to an old FD mount lens; it was perhaps not as sharp as the 12-35.

Hypotheses about the troublesome roof tiles? Maybe the low-pass filter in flinty's sensor was not properly functioning?
@flinty, on what lens were you shooting that burned out pub?
 
Last edited:
HotConductor said:
SDI is great for live broadcasting, but otherwise you are right. The 22x lens is great on the AC160, and the image quality itself is great. The HMC40 seems like a decent camera, just a step down from the GH2 visually.

I think this has really helped me makeup my mind. GH3 it is, unless Panny releases some awesome 4k/GH3/HMC hybrid do-it-all camera.

I appreciate your feedback. Those of us who actually film with our cameras (instead of comparing specs and debating Canon vs Panny vs RED) try to make gear last as long as possible. I can see my GH2s last a very long time. A GH3 with its small but meaningful improvements, seems like the logical step for me..
Click to expand...

You should also consider the ac90 since it seems to handle low light much better then the HMC40. I had a HMC40 and it was a great camera in good lighting. I know we all love our GH2's but the reality is that a video camera, well at least a good one, should look better. The HMC40 has higher native resolution, 3 chip color and luma detail, zero moire/aliasing and a zoom lens designed for zooming while shooting. Once the lights go down however it gets very muddy and grainy. Honestly compared to a slow zoom like the 14-140 it isn't all that bad but is a bit worse. The ac90 from what I understand go almost double the amount of gain and still look very good. There is a very good comparison video floating around comparing the ac90 to the GH2 with the 14-140 lens. The ac90 appears to spank the GH2 with the slower lens although we don't really know how far either camera was zoomed in. Even a video camera will get darker at full telephoto.

If you don't really want to spend the cash for the ac130 the ac90 should be a good in between option. Killer daylight video, uncompressed 4:2:2 hdmi output, XLR audio, zoom lens designed to zoom while shooting that will put your 14-140 to shame and better low light compared to your slower lenses. Fast primes will be better of course but sometimes shooting with a prime is just not an option.

As for loss of value, I think the GH cameras loose their value much faster. Professional video cameras like the SONY EX1 hardly ever loose value even though that camera is at least a couple of years old now. When I upgraded from my GH1 to GH2 a couple of months before the GH3 was announced I only paid $700.00. I believe that was only a year after the GH2 came out and it was already selling for a fraction of its initial price. Now it is hard to give them away. As soon as the GH3 was announced everybody expects to pick up a GH2 for less then $500.00. That is a huge loss of value in such a short amount of time. Professional cameras like the ac130/160 don't have to cut as many corners in terms of image quality and ergonomic features so they tend to hold their value much longer. Even some higher end HDV cameras still sell for top dollar compared to our GH cameras.
 
true true: I do some work for a production company in SF that still uses their HVX200s a LOT! For a lot of jobs, a video camera that was designed to be be a video camera is really the right tool. XLR ins, timecode, lots of goodies. Any the big zoom range you can get on a video camera! With a 1/3 or 1/2" sensor, it's far more affordable to get a big zoom range. That's why you can't get anything more than roughly a 3:1 or 4:1 (i.e. 24-105 et al) zoom range in any of the expensive canon lenses, but in your smaller sensor video cams, you get that great big zoom range. And you can zoom while shooting! Right tool for the right job is all that's about. You want cinematics? USe your DLSR or DSLM. You want a high-functioning flexible video camera? Use a video camera. Even an old one maybe...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top