GH2 driftwood hack in shootout with Canon C300

Vitaliy_Kiselev

>believe this is also why VK does not want P.Bloom discussions or even these silly shootouts talked about here

Try not to interpret my words your way, ok? I never aid anything like it.
All I said is that such things do not deserve your attention if you already have the camera.
And people can talk about any shootouts on our forum, be it PB or anyone else.
I can not like particular things, but it doesn not matter, really.

kholi

Was just going off of posts yo umade, but apparently I misinterpreted them. My bad.

bwhitz

"That blog is one of the few beacons of DSLRism that validates an entire cult of DSLR shooters, a number of whom will never touch a serious camera and don't understand anything beyond "give me everything for as cheap as possible.""

Serious cameras? Who are you trying to kid? Your post seem to place you on the other end of spectrum with the elitist Red camera snobs.

Vitaliy_Kiselev

@bwhitz

>Your post seem to place you on the other end of spectrum with the elitist Red camera snobs.

I think his post has a point.
Expirience with big constly cameras do not make anyone a snob.

bwhitz

"Expirience with big constly cameras do not make anyone a snob."

True. But it does if you think it somehow automatically invalidates others. Which was the tone I got from the post.

I've been on Red shoots where they're constantly basing "DSLRs toys" when their end product looks like garbage and could have easily been out-done by a film student with a T2i in 1/4 the time and 1/20th the budget.

If he would have said something like "a number of whom have never produced a serious FILM and don't understand anything beyond "give me everything for as cheap as possible." Then that would have been fine. It just sounded like he was being condescending towards those who have simply not worked with expensive cameras, regardless of any other factors.

Vitaliy_Kiselev

@bwhitz

Why you worry about tone of someones post, or opinions of the Red owners?
It can be what deep inside you are not certain in your current opinions :-)

bwhitz

"Why you worry about tone of someones post, or opinions of the Red owners?
It can be what deep inside you are not certain in your current opinions :-)"

Pretty much cause I'm bored and I don't like people talking down on others for such dumb reasons. Nothing else really. Oh well, happy new year, time to go out and drink now...

rigs

VK is bang on with his view about shoot outs. "All I said is that such things do not deserve your attention if you already have the camera."

Enough of the childish pandering folks- If you need someone esles to validate that your camera is good, or that you could also use his findings as a selling point,or too argue against other makes and models. It really doesn't matter whos or what is better. These things are always a never ending bunch of Bull shit. If you have a GH2 good for you, if you have any camera its just as good as long as you enjoying using it, heck you don't even have to be an expert or have the best gear out there to make something good. All you need is to believe in what you can do with any camera and not what someone else might say about it.

Mihuel

Sorry guys, but this whole issue can specify only one maxim: "So fucking what?"

Mimirsan

@rigs
Spot on!
Ive said before it seems like some just want constant validation that their camera is good. Put down other cameras just to make them feel that their camera is better.
Its just shows how insecure a lot of us are.
Anyway all is okay now "PB gives it the stamp of approval" ..........right? ;-)

danyyyel

For me it is not a feeling what is good or not. It is just knowing at least to a certain extend how each camera perform because I have no bias to any brand. I am a Nikon photographer, who bought a 7d because of the video and now a gh2. The gh2 is the first Panasonic gear that I have. I wanted to film and before the d7000, Nikon had nothing compared to the Canon. Then I saw the advent of the hack gh1 and then the gh2, that I bought. Unfortunately I don't have unlimited funds, or live in a country where I can try all these cameras.

This is why a test like this is very important to me. I had planned and could have stretched financially for an Af100 or an FS100 if they provided some good to substantial quality difference against the gh2. I cannot be sure 100% on Mr X,Y or Z telling me that the gh2 is better or on par to some other camera or the contrary because you have a set of fanboys and hatters that pollute any forums (This comment is not directed at some posters that a really value there judgement, I hope they recognize who they are). Now at least I can have a good idea with my own eyes. Yes, most of us know that it is very good in terms of resolution, but what about the rest. I wrote above in my previous post a simple scenario about the FS100. If it shows to be much better than the gh2 in low light (hypothetical because no one has any clue). Lets say by 3 stop, it could put it back in contention against the gh2 because where one could operate with some simple battery powered led light, the other one would need to use HMI and a grip truck to get the same result. In terms of detail it might loose a little bit, but you could still use an external recorder to get intra base codec at 200 mbit like the ninja and benefit from much better low light (all this is just hypothetical). So these other test will be more revealing about the different cameras and there respective price to performance ratio.

derek

danyyyel yes the Fs100 Clearly in low light is better, but in the cinema lights are used ,i nevar like quality of sony cameras F3 and FS100, the old redone also is not good in low light and epic so? GH2 perfome bettar in day time and cost 700$

danyyyel

You had the chance to test it, that is good for you. But me I cannot, so as the Chinese say, a picture is worth a thousand words. For the people like me that cannot test both, the Philip bloom test (unfortunately we don't have better more scientific ones) will be worth a lot to asses the different camera. In the end some will find that the $ 5000 might be worth it and others don't.

DrDave

一畫勝千言

griplimited

GH2 looks good, we already knew that and that's why we own one or even two. 2011 was justifying this camera to play with the big boys. Now let's make 2012 the year of it being used.

The end.

Aria

Why does everyone just assume that everyone here already has a GH2? I just got a GH13 and am trying to learn how to shoot with that. It's also good for me to start seeing comparisons of other cameras, because I plan to use the GH13 as my B cam and am still deciding on whether to get a GH2 or AF100. I found the resolution test to be quite illuminating, cuz just reading guys saying that they feel the GH2 has better resolution or at the least equal rez to the AF100 isn't enough. I actually liked seeing it too. This doesn't mean it's the only test or that it's the best test. Just another view to add to the process of deciding.

I also found it interesting to see the C300 in a raw unpolished way and comparing that to the GH2 as well. I like the rough methods of the test, cuz often I don't have ideal situations and have to film in a rough setting with changing variables. I'm not a GH fanboy, tho it's really growing on me. I learned some things from the test and look forward to more.

PixCanFly

I think camera test/shootout are not a bad thing for people who don't buy but rent gear instead. I know a lot of good dp doesn't own professional camera except maybe a point and shoot cam.

derek

part2

Oedipax

Damn, original is 2.2gb :) Grabbing now before Vimeo inevitably runs out of downloads for the day, thanks.

MarkV

wow! The Sonys cameras did really good in low light! The Log is pretty damn good thing to have! Over all the FS100 G-LOG A did superb and the F3 also, maybe bit better! Way to go Sony..

The DSLRs really need a bit of light there..

derek

for me is more important resolution,en the end of day,you need lighting for shot movies.

itimjim

I tell you what though. Even though Phil goes on about the GH2 not being a low light camera, I still think the characteristics of the noise with the Driftwood hack are better than the Canon's. The 5D and 7D just look like horrible smeared out plastacine faces. The 5N had a better profile, but still horrible macroblocking noise, and I'd expect the Nikon to be the same.

In terms of combination of low light, gradability and resolution, nothing, and I mean nothing can touch the Driftwood GH2vk.

rozroz

GH2 really fails in low light :( , but that understandable.

the C300 wasn't a big hit either.

but i DID like those magnificent BANDING streams on the 7D and 5D ;)

F3 and F100 are clear winners of the low light test.

pvjames

I'm happy with the skin tones on the GH2. Looks good and Its tweakable... Did better then expected. Its amazing looking at the rez again when zoomed in compared to the others. Lowlight is more challenging but none of us would seriously film in the dark like this w/o finding some kind of light source. That can be fixed. Skin tones can also be fixed but not resolution.

derek

pvjames yes, we no gh2 is not good in low light, and FS100 cost 5 times more and in the resolution test wan not better that 700$ camera,i hope gh2 can improve more in bit rate etc

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

Tags in Topic

Top Posters