GH2 Why GH2 over the canon equivalents?

Kholi can you or someone else with experience chime in on this.

So, lets say I buy a GH2 with the ultimate goal of also having the budget to buy a PL adapter from Hot rod cameras, in order to mount PL mount cine lenses to my GH2..

Since I've only worked with older primes/kit lenses.. how do the cine lenses differ, and is it better to rent an entire set (which would get pricey quickly) or would you be able to rent what specific lenses you'd need everytime you shot? Would you need a ton of lenses or would you be able to shoot with just a couple?

I've seen people do complete projects on one lens before (I know this isn't ideal) but what lenses would you rent if you were going that route?
 
If you're renting primes then you will generally get a combination of several lenses because one fixed lens is going to cripple your production. If you have a zoom that goes wide enough some people can get by fine with just that.
 
Azmyth said:
Kholi can you or someone else with experience chime in on this.

So, lets say I buy a GH2 with the ultimate goal of also having the budget to buy a PL adapter from Hot rod cameras, in order to mount PL mount cine lenses to my GH2..
Click to expand...

Smart Move.

Since I've only worked with older primes/kit lenses.. how do the cine lenses differ, and is it better to rent an entire set (which would get pricey quickly) or would you be able to rent what specific lenses you'd need everytime you shot? Would you need a ton of lenses or would you be able to shoot with just a couple?

I've seen people do complete projects on one lens before (I know this isn't ideal) but what lenses would you rent if you were going that route?
Click to expand...

Here's my experience with PL glass, and it's coming from the 35mm Adapter Days on up to now:

One Man Band Focusing - Cake Walk. Large Pitch, Long throw, buttery smooth if the glass has been taken care of. Hard Stops on either end. A little practice and you'll be able to do this on your own if you have to.

Color Reproduction (major) - Most Cine Glass is biased toward the warmer spectrum, that means a skin tone bias. They're also pretty accurate.

The Overall Look - There are some Still Lenses (Nikon 80-200, Nikon 200mm for example) that are optically sound for motion picture use. I've used a PL mounted 200mm Nikon and it's a beast of a lens, but freakin' awesome lookin' on EPIC. There's a specific look to cinema glass that screams "cinema". It's a combo of coating and overall meticulous design and engineering. Not all Cinema Lenses are only Cinema Lenses, though, like CP.2's are pretty much rehoused Zeiss ZE's.

These are the tree primary reasons why, even though I will probably shoot with the GH2 for my feature, I will use a Hot rod Cameras PL setup and Cinema lenses.

For the GH2, I'd say you need a 24-28 range prime, and a 40-50 range prime. If you could ONLY get those two lenses, you would be fine with a GH2 Hack setup.

If you could get a third, it should be an 11-16/2.8 Tokina or something in the range of 11-18 prime, you'll want the wide, trust me. Cinema Lenses are fast on the wide end, anyway, but costly.

For cost efficiency, look into Zeiss T2.1 Standards or Zeiss Compact Primes. I am not sure how I feel about CP.2's (compact primes), though. You may be able to find them easier, but if you can get someone to rent you two T2.1 standards I'd go for that instead.

The 28 can get a little hazy wide open, but by 2.8 it's fine.

Don't buy untested PL mount converted optics off of ebay

Make them prove that it works flawlessly, and make them give you a 30-45 day full refund guarantee if you decide to jump into that pool. Conversions are a job best left to serious professionals who give a damn.

There's another test vid in the "interior footage request" thread, one with some available parking garage fluo light in case you're still looking for that stuff.
 
Thank Kholi, extremely helpful.

When I first bought the GH1 that was the thing that sold me on it the most was the PL Lens adaptation.

Now, I may not have the budget for the lenses right off the bat, but if I can get my investors to see how much better the film will look on these lenses it might be doable. So its better to get a camera capable of it now, and do it when I have the means and shoot on my normal primes until then. I've seen some stuff shot on Nikon primes that are pretty close to "cinema" quality.. do you know which ones?

I know every lens looks different, but I think when you argue about what makes a movie look like a movie.. those cine lenses that hollywood uses is what gives it that inherent look that is enhanced by everything else they do on top of it.
 
Kholi, i've just gone through all of your videos on vimeo.. got any other stuff you've done with the gh2 and those T2.1 lenses? Those look to be the barrier of being affordable.
 
Azmyth said:
Kholi, i've just gone through all of your videos on vimeo.. got any other stuff you've done with the gh2 and those T2.1 lenses? Those look to be the barrier of being affordable.
Click to expand...

Not just yet. I will have some more as I continue testing. AT this moment, I am digging into the lens debate with myself because I am not sure which glass I'd like to shoot with. My list is (in no particular order):

. Zeiss Super 16mm Superspeed Set: 10-100/2, 5.9/2, 8/1.3, 9.8/2.4, 12/1.3, 16/1/3, 25/1.3 (requires shooting in ETC mode, which most of my footage has been from)
-- Downside to this is having to shoot in ETC, which is still pretty awesome looking on a massive screen (2K projector), but sometimes the noise can be overbearing.
-- The 5.9mm (which should equal about an 11mm with ETC mode) is nice and wide, but with no focus ring (at all) it will be hard to use.
-- Upside? 10-100/2 Zoom? Technically wouldn't need another lens. But when I do, the others are swift and sharp.
-- Incredibly awesome vintage look out of the box. Swear it screams S16 when I look at it and just watch it all come together with color adjustments etc.

. Zeiss Standard Speed T2.1 Set: 16, 20, 28, 32, 40, 85 (all T2.1, which should be equal to F1.3)
-- 28mm Blooms wide open but is good at about 2.8 and on.-
-- No zoom, switching lenses means losing time, especially without an AC present.
-- Slow for exterior night work.

. Red Pro Primes: 18, 25, 35, 50, 85
-- T1.8 across the board and pretty damned sharp by T2. These would be great for night exteriors, or lowlit material.
-- Big and HEAVY. They're huge, heavy. Tanks.
-- Do have matching zooms, 17-50/T2.9 and then the 18-85/T3
-- Not a fan of the sterile, clinical look. Micro Contrast makes things look crunchy.

. Cooke 18-100/T3
-- Slow
-- Heavy and huge; foot print won't be nearly as small, and I won't be doing any kind of handheld with it unless I can figure out a rig. Tripod? Must.
-- Very vintage look, though, and I shot over half of my feature with this lens.
-- Easy to ND with slip-in NDs (rare, but we have them)
-- Handles flares QUITE nicely

. Cooke Panchro Set: 18, 25, 32, 50, 75 -- All T2.8
-- Glorious color, flare, fall-off, so on and so forth.
-- Can be a bit heavy, but nowhere near as heavy as RPPs or the Cooke Zoom
-- Again, not running with a Zoom could prove testy.
-- T2.8 is even slower than the T2.1's, but they're sharper wider open than the Zeiss Standards
-- Did I mention the glorious color and fall-off?

Honorable Mentions:

. SLR Zoom Triple Threat : Tokina 11-16/2.8, Nikon 14-24/2.8, Nikon 70-200/2.8
-- Would need an adapter for all of these.
-- Still need something between the 24 and 70, possibly a 35mm Prime
-- Again, too many lenses
-- Upside though, 14-24 would probably be the GH2 workhorse and that sucker is crazy.
-- THe 70-200/2.8 is fair game wide open in the mid range and is rather creamy lookin'
-- Colors from all of these lenses are nice, although the Tokina fairs cold.

Dream List:

. Pair of DP Rouge Zooms
-- 'Nough said

. New Zeiss Anarmophics or Zooms
-- Again, 'nough said

. Hawk Anamorphic Zoom
-- Maybe I didn't say enough said enough?



Right now, the top top on my list are the S16's. I'm holding out hope that some weird hack improvement will get a cleaner ETC mode, then it's on. Second would be Panchros, I just auto-assume that they're going to be sweet but I need to go and test. I'm going to test the Panchros and RPPs very soon, and then try to get my hands on some Anamorphics. I'd trade noise and speed for Anarmophic instant cinema look!

For the record, I did test RPPs with the unhacked camera on our Feature, wasn't too impressed with the look. I also shot GH2 + Cooke Panchro on the feature for some pickups, and GH2 + 11-16/2.8 for pickups without the hack.

GH2CookeRPP.jpg


A lot of this I'm going to cover on my blog.
 
If you want to find other affordable primes that kind of give you that hollywood cinema look, check out the Jupiter-8 50mm (old soviet lens, but very cinematic) and the Sigma 30mm 1.4. Both definitely have a unique cinematic quality.
 
Definitely going to check those out. I also thought I heard someone say one time that certain nikon lenses had a fairly nice cinematic look to them?
 
Azmyth said:
Definitely going to check those out. I also thought I heard someone say one time that certain nikon lenses had a fairly nice cinematic look to them?
Click to expand...

Indeed, in fact Gareth Edwards used a Nikkor 50mm 1.2 for almost the entirety of his movie "Monsters". That lens is one of the de facto "budget" cinematic primes... period. Softness and sharpness balanced to pretty much perfection with that lens... it's gotta great look. Just watch Monsters if you want to see how it transformed a very "videoy" EX3 into something that almost looked like film... pretty impressive. It's definitely on my wish list haha.
 
I don't agree that the Canon 50/1.4 exhibits anything close to the IQ of a cinema prime. The Letus Ultimate did the job of diffusing what the Nikon was doing, ground glass intermediate between the lens and the camera's sensor. Not to mention the Nikon 50's (maybe not the newest one, but I'd wager) exhibit nasty CA wide open at 1.4. Violet and Green, and they breathe harder than a sleeping, overweight sailor.

Compare a Nikon 24, 50, or 85 lens to even a Zeiss Superseed T2.1 of the same focal length. The difference is drastic.

However, the 70-200, 200mm, and 14-24? Slightly different stories.

On another note, I accidentally shot some Digital Zoom 2x mode stuff: at worse, it looks like T2i footage to me. At least with these S16 lenses, and you get a lot more FOV out of the Zeiss Superspeed s16's with them. Compared to ETC, it isn't nearly as sharp/resolute and has aliasing (again, reminding me of Canon footage) but it could be useful in some circumstances with this combo.

It's gonna be a hard choice deciding between Standard Speeds and the S16 set.
 
anyone know of any retailers that are still selling GH2's for 699? that actually have them in stock.
 
Just a tiny little follow up to my lens post:

I'm adding RPPs (RED Pro Primes) to the list. (I will probably move these to the other thread)

RED Pro Primes - 18, 25, 35, 50, 85, 100 all in T1.8

- Sharp as heck wide open, and designed for the application. Very tame abberations, etc.
- Distortion wont' be crazy on the 18mm
- Full set, all the way up to 100
- HEAVY as heck though, and large... talking about lugging around a lot of pounds.
- Still need an 11-16/2.8 or something faster.

Also adding the Olympus Zooms, 14-42/2 and the 35-100/2, but I'm not a fan of how crunchy they are. The 14/2 could prove quite useful, however.

I got a chance to strap these lenses onto the camera really quick and grab some no light interior footage and was quite impressed with the RPP 18/1.8. The 35-100/2 Oly has a nice range on it, it's sharp, but it's super crunchy. Still, it looks nice on the camera and seems to be sharp wide open, as well. I'd imagine the 14-42 would be the same.
 
I have 2 recently purchased from adorama, one never opened and one only opened for testing. the one opened for testing I can let go for $675 and the if your interested, practicly new. pm me so i don't half to go through a return hassle.
 
Anyone used a Zeiss ZF lens with the GH2?

I've just ordered my GH2 and have a NEX-7 on order for...whenever it comes out.

I'm thinking Zeiss ZF lenses, w/the aperture ring, could be a good set of lenses to get into as they'll be compatible with all these mirrorless cameras w/an adapter.

Of course, one could just get the M-Mount lenses but still.
 
Last edited:
I think I'll put a GH2 on my shopping list (Instead of the NEX5 I was planning). Amazon do a body for £615.

BUT

I'm finishing off a 15 min Occult Horror short on my 550D, and don't want to have to match shots in post.

AND

I've put so much on my credit card lately (Leica primes mostly) that I'm not sure I can afford it yet.

In any case it'll be a stop gap until I see what Canon are doing with their next generation DSLRs or C-DSLR and if I can streatch.
 
andrew00 said:
Anyone used a Zeiss ZF lens with the GH2?

I've just ordered my GH2 and have a NEX-7 on order for...whenever it comes out.

I'm thinking Zeiss ZF lenses, w/the aperture ring, could be a good set of lenses to get into as they'll be compatible with all these mirrorless cameras w/an adapter.

Of course, one could just get the M-Mount lenses but still.
Click to expand...

I have, just last night In fact. They are pretty contrasty, the cool cast may make it a tad had to net warmer skin but they will be sharp stopped down to 2.8. Wide open they fringe purple which is a sad affair.

It would be nice to try the new zooms and Anamorphics from Zeiss. As they make some of my fave cinema glass.
 
Kholi (or anyone else) any experience with the Red 18-85? I've heard it's heavy as hell, but I'm more concerned with the image.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top