GH2 Sony NEX-7/A77 - serious competitors for the GH2?

Wish we could see some raw clips straight from the camera. The compression in these vimeo clips makes the clips look very underwhelming. Will hold off judgment until I can see more footage.
 
i watched all the video on their vimeo channel shot with the new sonys and wow, horrible. i sent him a message asking for some raw uncompressed 24p. i bet if others do the same well get it.
 
Giving a new camera like the A77 to DPreview to "test" the video functionality is a good way to guarantee getting crappy-looking video. They probably stopped down to f/22 and set the shutter to something like 1/250. Best to wait until someone who really knows what they're doing with video gets a chance to shoot with it before passing judgment.
 
What is good about having invested in the gh2, is that with the hack I am less than bothered by what is coming out. The only way to get a better dslr would be one with at least uncompressed hdmi out. Until we see more and have more info on the Sony a77 hdmi output the gh2 will clearly be a better camera in pure image quality. It has some desirable features like the metal weather sealed body, very good evf, 60p and peaking to name a few. When we will be able to get the true image quality of the A77, we will be able to have a better judgement.
 
Stephen Mick said:
And hey…I'm also interested in using the A77 as…gasp…a STILL CAMERA! :D
Click to expand...

Same here. Have a GH2 and while yes, it is amazing for video work, I have produced better stills with a Canon point and shoot. I would ideally like to have the best of both worlds in one camera (that's probably asking way too much, but one can hope) and so far this seems to be the most hopeful candidate...we'll see.
 
Yes, the GH2 v3.62d sure makes me care less about many other cameras. The A77 will have to be mind blowing good to trump what I'm seeing right now off of the GH2 with 3.62d 66mb/s AQ4.
I will be surprised if Sony gives us a lot here, granted it does 1080 60P which is enticing... But, never fail -> Sony will fall short from the mark to not hamper their "higher end" camera sales.

I certainly hope i'm wrong since I could care less who makes a great camera for reasonable $$. Time will tell soon. As I'm viewing my GH2 footage right now, it will have to "pull my chain" to make me break away from this! lol
 
As far as a "Still Camera" goes - I am getting SICK (that means 'good' haha) results with my GH2...but I come from a background of only having fully manual old Nikons, so taking the required steps to get a good image in second-nature for me..
However - I TOTALLY AGREE that Canon makes cameras that give the most amazing 'point and shoot' results I have ever seen.
 
Original clips are showing obvious aliasing. Not impressed with what I'm seeing so far. I think I'm definitely spoiled by the hacked GH1/2 footage I've seen which looks a lot better to my eyes. Still open minded though until I see more footage.
 
a.m. said:
Same here. Have a GH2 and while yes, it is amazing for video work, I have produced better stills with a Canon point and shoot. I would ideally like to have the best of both worlds in one camera (that's probably asking way too much, but one can hope) and so far this seems to be the most hopeful candidate...we'll see.
Click to expand...
I seriously doubt that you could produce better stills with a Canon point and shoot as regards image quality. I use both a Canon DSLR system, an older 4/3 DSLR system, where my newest camera is not as good as the GH2 regards image quality. The 4/3 system is capable of producing image quality, which is not far from that produced by the Canon APS-C files. It's not quite as good at high ISOs, and gets worse as the ISO increases. The Panasonic 4/3 sensors tend to clip highlights a bit earlier, and the files are not quite as robust as the Canon files for heavier tonal adjustments in post-processing - but 4/3 or m4/3 sensors are a country mile ahead of any smaller sensored digital compact as regards image quality. The best digital compacts can in good light produce reasonably big prints not easily distuinguishable from a larger sensored DSLR files, but once you pixel peep the difference is quite clear. I had high hopes for the A77, and whilst I don't think it's a bad camera, from what I have seen so far, it is not yet quite there as an ideal hybrid as regards image quality for both video and stills. I'll probably pick up a GH2 now, because I can use my 4/3 lenses with it. My criticism of m4/3 is not so much the image quality as regards stills, but other limits, such as the range of cameras, lenses and accessories. I do a lot of close-up photography use teleconverters and extension tubes to get past life-size reproduction, and m4/3 simply doens't support them, except for using 4/3 lenses on Olympus m4/3 cameras. So I'd need the system to mature quite a bit, before I could see it as a one stop solution for stills as well as video.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top