Why I am not too worried about upgrading to the GH2 - behind the scenes

I agree with you. That's why I'm trying to get Canon ENG 1.8 zoom. I bet it will perform better than Canon 2.8L zoom in low light on GH2. But it's relatively big and heavy. It's a special lens for special occasions. Normally 20mm 1.7 and 50mm 1.4 will do it for me.

YMMV. Whatever works for you. Whatever works for me. Having more choice is a good thing.
 
Blackout said:
If anyone wants to see an even higher quality file: the blu-ray dump out of edius 6 is downloadable on vimeo[/url]
Click to expand...
I downloaded this AVCHD file and checked it out in Premiere CS5 and it looks beautiful in FHD 24p. However, the max bitrate appears to be less than 19Mbps, with Stream Parser reporting an average bitrate of 13.3Mbps. It is unable to parse the file properly, however, and displays an incorrect sequence of frames. I'm not trying to tear you down, but I would be concerned about the technical integrity of this file. The problem appears to be that frame 0 is corrupted, but I'm not familiar enough with the AVC header format to spot the issue.
 
Blackout, just get a GH2 buddy and try it out. We know that you love the GH13 and that camera may be very well working better for you than the Gh2 would, but you also may be very well surprised at what the Gh2 can do and do it better than the GH13. It comes down to how you use the tools that you have available to you, rather then what camera you have (I am pretty sure you would have done an amazing job with the Gh2 also) I like your work and your videos are funny as hell the Dino one especially.
 
Last edited:
lpowell said:
I downloaded this AVCHD file and checked it out in Premiere CS5 and it looks beautiful in FHD 24p. However, the max bitrate appears to be less than 19Mbps, with Stream Parser reporting an average bitrate of 13.3Mbps. It is unable to parse the file properly, however, and displays an incorrect sequence of frames. I'm not trying to tear you down, but I would be concerned about the technical integrity of this file. The problem appears to be that frame 0 is corrupted, but I'm not familiar enough with the AVC header format to spot the issue.
Click to expand...

I actually screwed up and uploaded the highly compressed out from Edius! I had thought I uploaded the high bit rate MTS file! Now I am even MORE impressed though.
Anyway, again, I plan on getting a GH2 but I'm in no rush. The AF-100 really will be what I'm looking for the GH2 I don't see really helping me that much.
I am uploading a b roll dolly shot now that should have all of your jaws drop. I'll make sure it is the raw mts.
 
stonebat said:
Most of good GH1 and GH2 clips were taken at low ISO. At low ISO, I see more value in GH13's high Mbps 720p60 mode. I have little kids. I gotta slow them down. Hehe.

YMMV. Exactly. Some people have compelling reasons to get GH2 asap. As a soccer dad, I don't. I can wait 3 months, 6 months, or a year. I got time. The rapid price drop has been the pattern for most of m43 products. Buy slowly. That's my strategy.
Click to expand...

Exactly my point as well. There is nothing astounding in the GH2 to make a properly set up GH13er run screaming to sell their camera and buy the GH2. I think it would be a silly idea to sell your rare hacked GH13 for such a lowball price. Keep the tool as a backup for the tricks it does. Get a GH2 when the dust settles. If you are starting out new, and you can only afford the GH2, then sure it makes sense. I am not a GH2 basher, I'm just saying I'm not freaking out on some stand by list for it from all I have seen it's nice and will be yet another useful edition but there's no big deal to me and I doubt any of my clients would notice any improvement.
 
Blackout said:
What is the actual advantage to shooting anamorphic on the GH13 and how does one go about it?
Click to expand...
It just looks fabulously cinematic, and the lenses are irresistably collectible. With a hacked GH1 and a 1.33x anamorphic adapter, you can shoot in a widescreen anamorphic 1920x810 video mode that requires no post-processing. More details in the following thread:

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?225252-Anamorphic-Cinemascope-in-Native-1920x810-MJPEG-Mode

Handheld test shots taken while location scouting:

 
Last edited:
I couldn't help but be curious about your super secret ninja 52 mbps hack. I can get mine up to 46, but have never broken the 50 barrier.

Are you keeping it a secret or would you be willing to share?
 
I have only actually HIT the 52 mbit speed a few times, and yes, time stops, monkeys dressed as clowns drop out of a black hole, and everything starts melting like a Salvador Dali painting mixed with some ether like fear and loathing in Las Vegas drug type color effects. Also - the image looks really really nice.

Just because you set the camera's minimum and maximum bitrates with ptools doesn't mean it hits it or uses it, it means that it CAN when the detail of the data requires it. Avchd is a very smart codec. I am sometimes very surprised when footage I shot that I for sure thought would be high bitrate ends up not being as high as I would think it would be.

Three shots in particular really hit it... a wide hand held from the top of the ghost busters building came close, and a few wides of a massive crowd scene at Coney island I shot in the exact same spot but on different days with nearly the same amount of people, and the difference pre and post hack was phenomenal, outstanding, and jaw dropping, and it's when I fell in love with the NEW camera and also was considering proposing to vitali (and no, I'm not gay.. I just loved the hack THAT much).

So I won't publicly post my numbers because yes, it is a competitive market here in NYC and I want to maintain my edge, but if you pm me I will help you, and I will say this much, it is pretty much the 'jobless D' settings with a few small changes I made here and there and then after I hit what I thought was as good as this camera was going to get I stopped futzing around with it and saved the hack file in 20 backups, and yes, against all odds and recommendations I have 24pn checked.

Also - note, GH1 sensors DO have a lot of variable noise between them. I have 3 cams, and 1 of mine is absolutely the cleanest and best and almost never gets the streaking even in absolute ridiculous low light pumped up to maximum iso gain.

Example:

(oops I will edit in the example later I can't find it)

Where as my 2nd and 3rd GH13s with the EXACT same hack settings are not as clean so they are B and C cams respectably.
 
Blackout said:
Also - note, GH1 sensors DO have a lot of variable noise between them. I have 3 cams, and 1 of mine is absolutely the cleanest and best and almost never gets the streaking even in absolute ridiculous low light pumped up to maximum iso gain.

...

Where as my 2nd and 3rd GH13s with the EXACT same hack settings are not as clean so they are B and C cams respectably.
Click to expand...

Ahh, I hope that doesn't mean I won't be able to approach the fantastic, eye-boggling visual quality of your delightful Dogs video. It was that that finally convinced me to dive into this dv lark (it's all your fault).

My GH1, recently purchased new from a department store, is WE9G******* - which makes it an early Chinese production example if I've done my lurking (reading) correctly. I think I've applied lpowell's safe settings and the unit seems very nice at 100 ISO (I've only had dismal fog to shoot in) but horrendous at 1600. It has jiggling horizontal/random noise overlaid by stable vertical streaks.

Which country/vintage is your super model? Does it look better at low ISOs than your similarly hacked B and C cameras? Are those two as stable as A with your super-secret mega patch?

Fumbling beginner needs encouragement.
 
Blackout said:
Also - note, GH1 sensors DO have a lot of variable noise between them. I have 3 cams, and 1 of mine is absolutely the cleanest and best and almost never gets the streaking even in absolute ridiculous low light pumped up to maximum iso gain.
Click to expand...

This is something that has intrigued me, the claims of better sensors. As you own three and two aren't quite there, do you see a possible clue to why the one is as it is ??? Do you think it could be a month of production, or factory location or country of destination ???
 
I have two myself....ones a old jan2009 black model that has ha some banding but has noticably reduced over the year (used daily) I used to see banding at 640-800 but now I only get some with 1600 iso and ive a new red model jan2010 that has no banding from what ive seen and looks cleaner in higher iso. both made in china.
 
I have two GH1's, a GF1, and a G2. The GH1's were bought in Nov 2009 and Mar 2010. I can't distinguish any significant difference between them. The GF1 has noticeably more random noise in low-light but looks as good as the GH1 in daylight. The G2 uses the same sensor as the GF1, but its low-light image quality is much better than the GF1, almost as good as the GH1.
 
ChipThome said:
This is something that has intrigued me, the claims of better sensors. As you own three and two aren't quite there, do you see a possible clue to why the one is as it is ??? Do you think it could be a month of production, or factory location or country of destination ???
Click to expand...

Obviously it can be all these issues and more. These are factories, and things are NOT perfect.. one stamped sensor might have micro issues in it that 'passes' quality inspection but still makes it not as good as another sensor.

They have different workers, different factories, different parts from different dealers... I mean, it's a miracle these things turn on and work at all when you think about it, so OF course there will be variances!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top