Cosimo Bullo
Veteran
AF100-101 rocks too, XLR inputs, built-in ND, etc. Both create very nice images in the right hands.
Panasonic Gh2 and Af-100 in german
- Thread starter Danielvilliers
- Start date
Ian-T
Veteran
+1
astigmatic
Well-known member
Test conditions were not lab perfect. Simply lighting a chart with a lamp and pointing the camera at it. Lens used was a zeiss 35mm stopped down to f/4. Iso at 200. Cinema D gamma. Detail levels turned down.
I mean this is definitely of decent quality, but knowing the gh2 has higher rez is somewhat frustrating.
walnutcrunch
Well-known member
No details on the af-100 setup that I could see.
So many people are eager for the 100 to fail because it proves that the pro divisions are still getting bested by the stills guys. It's the awesome deal. It's the underdog, it's thinking you got way more than you paid for.
For us the res charts don't matter at all. We can't shoot on a gh2. It doesn't fit our workflow and there'd be too much screwing around to make it work for what we need it for.
AF100 is exactly what we need
So many people are eager for the 100 to fail because it proves that the pro divisions are still getting bested by the stills guys. It's the awesome deal. It's the underdog, it's thinking you got way more than you paid for.
For us the res charts don't matter at all. We can't shoot on a gh2. It doesn't fit our workflow and there'd be too much screwing around to make it work for what we need it for.
AF100 is exactly what we need
Cosimo Bullo
Veteran
I think that's probably true of most people who have bought the AF100. If about much more than resolution.
Cosimo Bullo
Veteran
Um.... not following you.
walnutcrunch
Well-known member
Okay Mr. smart guy ghosttv...what do you use when you want to make a movie about people holding charts. What then?
Exact same sentiments. But other than that i still love my baby despite its flaws
Edit:
Based on my side by side test with a t2i,
Af100 resolves more detail (but imperceivable)
gamma can be graded on the 550d to match the af100
You can intercut both seamlessly
Last edited:
I guess I am apparently going to have to go out on a limb here and say resolution is not irrelevant to me. Further, the GH2 clearly has less moire and that difference will show up when you have got repeated patterns in urban environments.
Interesting test. But it is uch too early to acept the final judgment. A precise description of all test parameters lacks, the influence of optics, shutter angle, f-stops etc. is not investigated. The most important part of the test: shooting a chart while panning at the same pace and a the same shutter angle will give a more realistic test result.
Resolution is not all, especially with such small margins of divergence.
I am more concerned about color resolution (4:2:2 vs 4:2:0) and bit rate because despite all the praise given the AVCCAM codec, increased bit rate actually makes a difference (cp. GH13).
I am also not convinced how the aliasing shown by this slashcam.de test on test chart, translates into real life detoriation of image quality. My AF101 shows none of the aliasing my Canon 5D Mark II and 7D has shown. What about this?
I am withholding my conclusions until a more rigorous test is carried out. However it is intriging, I admit-
Resolution is not all, especially with such small margins of divergence.
I am more concerned about color resolution (4:2:2 vs 4:2:0) and bit rate because despite all the praise given the AVCCAM codec, increased bit rate actually makes a difference (cp. GH13).
I am also not convinced how the aliasing shown by this slashcam.de test on test chart, translates into real life detoriation of image quality. My AF101 shows none of the aliasing my Canon 5D Mark II and 7D has shown. What about this?
I am withholding my conclusions until a more rigorous test is carried out. However it is intriging, I admit-
You use PowerPoint.
Agree 100000+
You don't need charts to see that the gh2 is resolving more than the af100. Check out various footage online for yourself. Not exactly scientific- it's actually better because it's noticeable in real world conditions. It's also been noted by others on this board. Even though resolution is only one aspect of image quality, it does matter and is noticeable, even as small a margin as it is with the gh2 and af100.
I agree Adam, the strong OLP filter has been applied to the AF100 in order to cut high frequencies (band limiting, as the Nyquist/Shannon sampling theorem provides for), consequentially you cannot get more than a given resolution because of the resulting softening.
But we should not see aliasing on AF100, that's why a strong OLPF is there for.
Or, at least, AF100 should show much less aliasing than GH2, where antialiasing filtering needs to be compliant with 16 Mpixels resolution stills.
German test shows the same aliasing I've noticed on some AF100 MTS files, then I'm not actually surprised about that.
I just want to understand why the GH2 gives better aliasing performance without being as strongly band limited as the AF100.
Last edited:
BigBearDoinThangs
Active member
Wow so moire/aliasing was the #1 thing touted on AF100 over GH2, and the main reason for its much higher price point, but now that suddenly GH2 destroys AF100 in moire/aliasing test, suddenly everyone that was touting that point states "resolution doesn't matter to me". Oh now it suddenly doesn't matter?
Well it matters to the rest of us, I'll take a $1000 camera that produces a better and more PROFESSIONAL image than a $5000 one with an inferior image any day of the week. But hey, I've been called crazy before. (yuck yuck)
Well it matters to the rest of us, I'll take a $1000 camera that produces a better and more PROFESSIONAL image than a $5000 one with an inferior image any day of the week. But hey, I've been called crazy before. (yuck yuck)