LoL. My bad. I was typin' on my iPhone when I posted that... and, had literally just awakened. It fits you though!
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
GH2 Should I be surprised that an HPX 250 looks better than the GH2?
- Thread starter AdventMediaProductions
- Start date
LoL. My bad. I was typin' on my iPhone when I posted that... and, had literally just awakened. It fits you though!
j1clark@ucsd.edu
Veteran
The point I'd like to make from that analogy is that while the Porsche can do it with less effort, both vehicles are perfectly capable of doing well over 100mph.
Does that make the Porsche "better" at getting to your destination? sure, you will impress more people and if you can afford the luxury, it also feels great to use. But both can be used to get the job done.
I'll not get into certain cars that were not designed for operation much above 70-80 US 'road speed max'... don't do so well at over 100 mph... I don't know if you have ever felt a front end 'lift'... at about 110... but it is not a 'nice feeling'... slowly back off on the accelerator... and stay withing the essential design parameters of the car... now, many cars will do 90 ok on windless days...
But that's the point a device has design parameters, and there are some who can and do 'exceed them' successfully. In the case of comparing two cameras of recent engineering and manufacture... to pit the GH-2 against the HPX 250... is sort pointless... really...
Now, I could say that because the GH-1 has interchangeable lenses, that despite certain less thans, such as 4:2:0 sampling, I prefer the less lens distortion than the fixed lens offerings have, even at $5K. Ok... I'm using my encounter with the HMC 150... but I will be the fixed lenses of some of the current 'prosumer' video cameras in that class have major distortion problems at near 'wide angle' zooms.
And if I had $5K to spend, I'd probably buy two or three GH-2s, and hack 2 of them with different hacks for different qualities... that is keep one standard, then use to hacks that may cause problem but have the ability to give better quality...
As it is... I probably will upgrade my computer rather than upgrading from the GH-1... unless the GH-3 just blows my shorts and socks off...
Last edited:
Per Lichtman
Well-known member
@j1clark@ucsd.edu Depending on how old your system is you can upgrade to a faster one for a little less than the price of a GH2 without a body. If you are doing a lot of editing and have not upgraded your computer in at least 3 years, I think doing that before getting a new camera would be helpful.
But if you do not have to do much of your own editing, the new camera would help more. And for $5K you could get at least 5 GH2 bodies, maybe 6 or more.
But if you do not have to do much of your own editing, the new camera would help more. And for $5K you could get at least 5 GH2 bodies, maybe 6 or more.
Per Lichtman
Well-known member
No one's denying that these cameras are awesome. I use them pretty exclusively for a number of reasons. One is that my clients don't want to rent anything I don't already own most of the time, but a bigger reason is that it's so easy to get in quick and get beautiful shots while not seeming intimidating to people who may be at the event or whatever it may be I'm shooting. People respond better to a small, unobtrusive camera. I also choose that camera nearly every time, but I'm not going to delude myself into thinking it's inherently better than massively expensive and well designed cameras often made by the same companies. The GH anything doesn't give you the clarity and image control of a professiona videol camera, and on additional features for monitoring and audio there's no competition. But those big professional cameras are also harder to use right, and sometimes that makes all the difference.
A lot of clients do request DSLRs from me because they've heard that everything is better through one. I don't argue, it works fine, but I know that anything I shoot for them will look great no matter what it's on - HPX, GH2, iPhone, so forth. The right tool can mean a lot of things.
Well said.
For me, the GH2 is not just about the hack, it's the vast array of fine lenses it can use. Virtually any still or cinema lens made in the last 50 years can be adapted to work with the GH2 in both still and video modes. The list of optical marvels you can use with this camera is truly stunning, an enduring legacy of technological achievement that defies the planned obsolescence of the modern consumer marketplace. The ability to switch instantly from an f2.0 Olympus auto-focus zoom, to a vintage Canon L portrait lens, an ultra-fast Nokton, a razor-sharp Zeiss, or a crystal-clear Leica is a real joy, an experience that no other video camera system can match.
Cosimo Bullo
Veteran
As always, Lee, well said.
Edit: and all, if you haven't had a chance to try Driftwood's latest, Sedna, you must. There's just an overall refinement in the color reproduction in this patch.
Edit: and all, if you haven't had a chance to try Driftwood's latest, Sedna, you must. There's just an overall refinement in the color reproduction in this patch.
Last edited:
These are just two different camera systems. The HPX250 is an event/interview workhorse cam. The GH2 is a narrative digital cinema cam. When the HPX250 produces anything even remotely cinematic, with the DR and tonality of the GH2, then we'll have a real comparison.
Last edited:
As always, Lee, well said.
Edit: and all, if you haven't had a chance to try Driftwood's latest, Sedna, you must. There's just an overall refinement in the color reproduction in this patch.
Wait, he's figured out how to manipulate the camera's color??? Does it cure the green shift?
Dude, just punch in the combo - WB - down arrow - M-5, then pop the joystick and hit X and A buttons at the same timeWait, he's figured out how to manipulate the camera's color??? Does it cure the green shift?
Instant overkill baby!!!
Dude, just punch in the combo - WB - down arrow - M-5, then pop the joystick and hit X and A buttons at the same time
Instant overkill baby!!!
You know what's really funny (and stupid?). I literally just did this right before you posted, and it took me THAT long to finally test it out. But it looks like -2 is perfect on my color calibrated monitor.
-5 is what everyone's using? -3 was too much red in the skin, which means you'd be correcting it back the other way. -2 looks balanced.
It's also about the same amount of green balancing I'd do in post, anyway.
So manual white balance, -2 on the preset white balance, good to go.
True that. M-5 is more like what I use on Nostalgia with incandescents.-5 is what everyone's using? -3 was too much red in the skin, which means you'd be correcting it back the other way. -2 looks balanced.
True that. M-5 is more like what I use on Nostalgia with incandescents.
Forgot the film mode would make a difference.
Cinema -2, I need to see what standard is.
I use both the HPX250 and hacked GH2 a lot, mostly to shoot snowboarding - tons of light. I'd say that at if the lens is at the open end on the HPX250, it's pretty much as sharp and shows similar detail to the GH2 with a decent lens as long as it's not too stopped down. Where it really shines is in colour reproduction and post colouring. It's so much nicer dealing with the 10 bit Intra100. Dynamic range seems maybe a stop better on the HPX too (as I've got them set up anyway), although I haven't really tested it. Either way, both are amazing bang for buck, but I sure would like bigger buttons on both for my sausage fingers (at least they stay warm in the snow).