GH2 Philip Bloom Christmas Shootout

Mike@AF said:
Philip Bloom replaced part 1 with a new version, fixing the NEX5N footage because of post workflow issues that were hurting the image drastically.
Click to expand...

I heard the boss of Canon had a hissy fit after seeing the review and sent him some insulting emails, and then told him he had to sell all of his Canon cameras back to the company.

No wait; that could never really happen, could it?
 
editman said:
The times when you need more audio channels or quality recorded surely you have a sound engineer doing audio that's out of what the camera does. For everything else two channels and the internal quality is just fine.
Click to expand...
Nothing wrong with two channels. But, I just happen to think that 4 channels in ten times better than two. But of course you can use a mixer to get four into two. But then you need a mixer. I'm not saying the ancient, outdated 16 bit stereo in many "pro" cams is bad: it's totally fine. I'm just saying it is worse than a Zoom. And why should we settle for "worse than a Zoom"?
Because right now, what we get as "pro" is worse than a Zoom H2. And the advertising for these cams should say, "worse than a Zoom" right on a little shiny sticker that they put on the cam, because that is the truth, not "pro audio".
Plus, time is money. Four channels saves time--the setup does not need to perfect, you can adjust it later without an army of onlookers. Hooking up a mixer loses time. Four channels gives you a backup. And so on.
And why hire an audio engineer if you can hook up four tracks and mix it down later, maybe even in the camera? I think there is a very large number of people with flash recorders who would love to ditch that box for one that gives the same audio--or better, read "pro"-- built in to the cam. Plus the price should be included in the camera.
 
'I heard the boss of Canon had a hissy fit after seeing the review and sent him some insulting emails, and then told him he had to sell all of his Canon cameras back to the company.

No wait; that could never really happen, could it?'




And your point is?
 
DrDave said:
Nothing wrong with two channels. But, I just happen to think that 4 channels in ten times better than two. But of course you can use a mixer to get four into two. But then you need a mixer. I'm not saying the ancient, outdated 16 bit stereo in many "pro" cams is bad: it's totally fine. I'm just saying it is worse than a Zoom. And why should we settle for "worse than a Zoom"?
Because right now, what we get as "pro" is worse than a Zoom H2. And the advertising for these cams should say, "worse than a Zoom" right on a little shiny sticker that they put on the cam, because that is the truth, not "pro audio".
Plus, time is money. Four channels saves time--the setup does not need to perfect, you can adjust it later without an army of onlookers. Hooking up a mixer loses time. Four channels gives you a backup. And so on.
And why hire an audio engineer if you can hook up four tracks and mix it down later, maybe even in the camera? I think there is a very large number of people with flash recorders who would love to ditch that box for one that gives the same audio--or better, read "pro"-- built in to the cam. Plus the price should be included in the camera.
Click to expand...

Unless you are shooting relatively static setups, it seems like too much to encumber the camera with 4 channels of audio connections, whether hard wired or wireless. Sometimes double system is more practical.
 
Finally got a GH2 yesterday and hacked it (thank you to those responsible) for use with work. This is the video camera I've wanted for years.

I'll probably be selling my 550D (T2i) and buying my own GH2, I like it that much. The video quality on the 550D / 7D is blurry, aliased and ugly (love the stills though).
 
mr bill said:
'I heard the boss of Canon had a hissy fit after seeing the review and sent him some insulting emails, and then told him he had to sell all of his Canon cameras back to the company.

No wait; that could never really happen, could it?'




And your point is?
Click to expand...

Just a joke, man. Philip Blooms video suddenly gets taken down and everyone started wondering why it disappeared. These days the truth can be stranger than fiction; just saying'.
 
simonpwood said:
Just a joke, man. Philip Blooms video suddenly gets taken down and everyone started wondering why it disappeared. These days the truth can be stranger than fiction; just saying'.
Click to expand...

And an uber funny joke it was! I got it, but I guess some people don't get it maybe because they weren't aware of the tragic RED situation our wonderful PB had to deal with. We'll end it at that cause I don't want people derailing and talking about that event all over again. Funny stuff Simonpwood. Luckily, Canon is too smart to pull that stunt the other company did.
 
simonpwood said:
Just a joke, man. Philip Blooms video suddenly gets taken down and everyone started wondering why it disappeared. These days the truth can be stranger than fiction; just saying'.
Click to expand...

I too was amused. I saw the vid on youtube, when I went back to re-watch it, it was gone. He never put the fixed version back up.
 
I think like many the guy the last few days, he has been enjoying some time with his family and friends. More or less everything has been shot but the editing that is left from what I understand.
 
Good one simonpwood :)

The new part 1 is back up. If you look at his blog on facebook he's overseas somewhere with a very poor internet connection and can't get Part 2 uploaded until he's back.

Here's the direct link to part 1 http://vimeo.com/34279033
 
Last edited:
Philip has done a real service here. He's right that these tests are not for a definitive decision on which camera to buy. There are other variables and each of these cameras will behave differently and maybe favor one condition over another.

It does appear when it comes to pure detail considering moiré, aliasing, and compression artifacts, the GH2 appears to perform well in this test.
I was surprised with how bad several of these cameras performed on this comparison.

I'm sure the GH2 will not fair as well when comparing dynamic range. ;}
Although the hack will certainly show benefits on the ability to render detail in lower light conditions.
 
Just looked at the revised footy to check out the Nex 5N with the corrected encoding--better, but still mushy. Disappointed.
 
The A65 and A77 (with the same sensor) are limited to ISO1600 for video even in manual mode. I wonder if the NEX 7 is the same.
 
GH2 is not bad in low light. With a noise reduction in post it can almost match FS100 and C300. Great for its price point.
 
GH2 really fails in low light, but that understandable.
the C300 wasn't a big hit either.
but i DID like those magnificent BANDING streams on the 7D and 5D ;)

F3 and F100 are clear winners of the low light test.
 
LOW LIGHT TEST- no details on lens yet or F stop.
We are guessing in the dark what he did right / wrong.

Did he shoot at F2.8?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top