GH2 Why do we need a GH3? Isn't the GH2 enough? What should Panasonic do for GH3?

Ian-T said:
Not true.
Click to expand...

What is not true?

I use my monitor connected to the HDMI port of the GH2 all of the time, and it works in all of the 1080 modes. I don't use 720 so I hadn't tried that at the time (had the camera a week or two at the time).

I have tested it since and while using HDMI Out, the manual film mode only works at 1080 and the other options are greyed out.

AS far as the hacks messing with the HDMI output, I read about that and was upfront about the fact that I didn't know if what I read was factual or not.

I only know that in all of my double blind tests, the hacks produced more noise. The argument was that they would hold up better for grading and keying. I since ran further tests and found that not to be true under unbiased testing conditions with observers that didn't know which file was hacked or unhacked.


Ian-T said:
Again, not true.
Click to expand...

No, it is true.

My statement was that I read that the GH1 may be better with noise than the GH2, and I in fact did read that... multiple places.

I personally don't know if it's true because I don't have a GH1.

Maybe a more thorough comment on your part would be more beneficial to the community.
 
From my experience of shooting with the GH2 for the past 18 months, the hacks only improve the image quality of the GH2. ( sometimes substantially )

Compared to Canon and Nikon equivalents, the GH2 sensor is quite a bit noisier, but as long as you don't go above 800 ISO the GH2 can produce absolutely beautiful results.

With any luck the GH3 will have less noise and greater dynamic range, making it a nice step up from the GH2. I just hope the GH3 hacks don't take too long to appear. ( I will probably hold off buying a GH3 until the hacks are out )
 
TheDingo said:
From my experience of shooting with the GH2 for the past 18 months, the hacks only improve the image quality of the GH2. ( sometimes substantially )

Compared to Canon and Nikon equivalents, the GH2 sensor is quite a bit noisier, but as long as you don't go above 800 ISO the GH2 can produce absolutely beautiful results.

With any luck the GH3 will have less noise and greater dynamic range, making it a nice step up from the GH2. I just hope the GH3 hacks don't take too long to appear. ( I will probably hold off buying a GH3 until the hacks are out )
Click to expand...

The highest I would go on Canon was 1250 iso but my sweet spot was 640 and 320-160 when possible. I have yet to fully test my new GH2 and night, but in your experience you say to never go above 800 iso? Is 1250 really bad (that is the highest I would go)?

I will be testing my camera real soon, I have just been editing all week.
 
OldCorpse said:
confirmed by a Panasonic rep, who in essence said that they are aware of the hack, but they can't duplicate it, because they have to hew to the limits of the AVCHD codec limitations, and can't simply arbitrarily change stuff.
Click to expand...

This is a flat out lie. They can change whatever the hell they want. They don't do it because they're scared of hurting AF100 sales. They have to protect the AF100 because they didn't have the sense to spec it well enough to protect itself.

There is absolutely no excuse for a GH3 that can't max out its hardware. None. If the GH3 does 24Mbps or whatever bullshit data rate, it better be because that's the absolute most data the hardware can move (it should therefore be a a fair bit cheaper than the GH2 which can handle 5x that).
 
Lee Saxon said:
This is a flat out lie.
Click to expand...

Not sure how that follows it is a lie. I'm sure there is some definite concern over protecting the AF-100, but specs are specs for a reason, and the hack clearly puts the .MTS out of spec for the agreed upon parameters for AVCHD. There's no two ways about it.

What's the point of having specs if you can change them on a whim?
 
Last edited:
Lee Saxon said:
This is a flat out lie.
Click to expand...

No, it's not a lie. What it is, is a standard. If Panasonic wants to keep the AVCHD logo on the camera, the camera has to meet the AVCHD standards. The difference between having that logo on their camera or not having it on the camera is a huge percentage of the potential sales for the camera. Enough that they probably wouldn't bother to make the camera at all without supporting AVCHD. What I'm hoping for, is support for AVCHD v2.0 which will get us 1080p60 out of the box. A better base for hacking maybe.
 
J.F.R. said:
I have yet to fully test my new GH2 and night, but in your experience you say to never go above 800 iso? Is 1250 really bad (that is the highest I would go)?
Click to expand...

I recommend that each person do their own tests and decide for themselves what is acceptable. What might be great for me, might not work for you.

I find that the GH2 video image starts to seriously degrade once you go above 800 ISO, especially with darker tones and blacks, where noise and banding on long gradient backgrounds ( like the night sky ) can get really ugly. Owning a Voightlander 25mm f/0.95 for my GH2 definitely helps, but having a camera that can record good images at 6400+ ISO is a better solution.

If I had to shoot very low-light footage and had a budget for rentals I would probably rent a Canon 5D MK3 / Canon C300 / Sony FS-100 / Sony FS-700 / Sony F3, because all of these camera are several stops better than a GH2 in dim light.
 
No, it's not a lie. What it is, is a standard.
Click to expand...

Why can't people understand that? If you want to venture out of that standard just hack the thing. that's all. Am sure a hack for the GH3 will eventually happen. I wish the GH3 has MJPEG 1080p24!
 
Yea, dim light is the enemy of most cameras frankly. The GH2... considering the budget/value beats everything (depending on the hack your using and lenses). I have no issues up till about iso 1600.
However, yes many cameras that cost many times the GH2 will do handle the higher ISO better.

I have a feeling that the GH3 will preform similarly (only slightly better) in low light as most 4/3 sensors do now. Probably the only notable changes will be a faster processor (meaning better/higher bitrate hacks...down the road), and 60fps in 1080p.
 
Bruce Watson said:
No, it's not a lie. What it is, is a standard. If Panasonic wants to keep the AVCHD logo on the camera, the camera has to meet the AVCHD standards.
Click to expand...

I understand that, I'm saying they don't have to keep the AVCHD logo on the box. They choose to use off-the-shelf code from 2006 so they don't have to spend any R&D dollars.

Bruce Watson said:
The difference between having that logo on their camera or not having it on the camera is a huge percentage of the potential sales for the camera.
Click to expand...

Why? I'm completely unaware of the upside (for the consumer) of an outdated standard that arbitrarily limits a camera's capabilities regardless of its hardware capabilities.
 
Last edited:
Lee Saxon said:
Why? I'm completely unaware of the upside (for the consumer) of an outdated standard that arbitrarily limits a camera's capabilities regardless of its hardware capabilities.
Click to expand...

Because it's a format that's most compatible with the majority of SD cards that are out there.
 
Lee Saxon said:
Why? I'm completely unaware of the upside (for the consumer) of an outdated standard that arbitrarily limits a camera's capabilities regardless of its hardware capabilities.
Click to expand...

Completely unaware? Sounds like willful ignorance. You can't see the advantage of being able to take your SDHC card to your computer, drop your footage in your NLE, and go? Or plug that SDHC card into your DVD player or TV and just watch it straight out of the camera? That is what AVCHD does for the consumers, and nearly all of them consider it a powerful upside.

It's not about the "camera's capabilities" at all. It's about the consumers' convenience. If you were really interested in nothing but image quality, you'd be shooting film. Not at all convenient, but still hard to beat for image quality. At the very least, you'd be shooting with an actual video camera and a higher end CODEC, but those cameras tend to be considerably bigger and require better supports, which again isn't very convenient.

It's way more convenient to shoot with a small consumer stills camera that's hanging around your neck anyway. Small, lightweight, and with all kinds of OIS and autofocus, you can easily handhold it. If it also happens to make quite good video too that's a plus. And if you can pop that SDHC card into your laptop and play the birthday footage for your kids right there on site at the waterpark, well... And here we are back to the AVCHD standard, which makes all that easy connection stuff possible.

You might not see any of this as an upside, but the average consumer buying these m43 cameras from Panny surely does. And Panny knows it.
 
daihard said:
I have a feeling that the GH3 will preform similarly (only slightly better) in low light as most 4/3 sensors do now.
Click to expand...

The new Olympus OM-D EM-5 M4/3 camera is pretty much equivalent to Canon/Nikon APS-C cameras when it comes to low-light and dynamic range. It's the first M4/3 camera that I would consider competitive to Canon/Nikon when it comes to shooting stills.

The Famous Reddit Proposal Captured on the Spur of the Moment with the Olympus OM-D EM-5 Camera with Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 Lens

Reddit Photographer Captures Candid Marriage Proposal

...My hope is that the GH3 uses the same sensor or something equivalent, so that we finally have a good low-light and high dynamic range M4/3 video solution. ( the Olympus EM-5 is a very weak video shooter )
 
Gary Huff said:
Because it's a format that's most compatible with the majority of SD cards that are out there.
Click to expand...

That's marketing hype. SD cards are just flash memory. Every file format, from AVCHD to R3Ds to Excel spreadsheets, is equally compatible with it. Don't pay more for a card that says it's especially for one task or another unless it has faster write speeds.

Bruce Watson said:
Completely unaware? Sounds like willful ignorance.
Click to expand...

A little snarkier than necessary

Bruce Watson said:
You can't see the advantage of being able to take your SDHC card to your computer, drop your footage in your NLE, and go? Or plug that SDHC card into your DVD player or TV and just watch it straight out of the camera? That is what AVCHD does for the consumers, and nearly all of them consider it a powerful upside.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with any of this.

But those reasons to include AVCHD for home movies are also a good reason to include JPEG for snapshots. But that doesn't stop Panasonic from ALSO including Raw stills for more serious shooters. Why not do the same with motion capture? Make AVCHD the default but include an option that maxes out the hardware's throughput?

I was answering that question when I posted the comment, "[because then they'd have to] spend money on R&D."
 
I was solely referring to card speeds. What do you think is the most purchased class of card? Dollars to donuts says it's Class 4.
 
Bruce Foreman said:
This is why I cancelled my pre-order for the E-M5 and went for GH2 instead.
Click to expand...

I have high hopes for the GH3 when it is announced next month.

My worst case scenario is to buy an E-M5 just for still photo work. ( super fast AF, great dynamic range, low noise sensor, great JPEG engine )
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top