Personal View site logo
Make sure to join PV on Telegram or Facebook! Perfect to keep up with community on your smartphone.
Please, support PV!
It allows to keep PV going, with more focus towards AI, but keeping be one of the few truly independent places.
GH2 driftwood hack in shootout with Canon C300
  • 471 Replies sorted by
  • derekderek

    LPowell Nikon D700 is not good camera D5100 also.you say D5100 is better camera?

  • LPowellLPowell

    I was disappointed in Bloom's failure to include the Nikon D7000 in the low-light tests. While I wouldn't expect it or any DSLR to seriously compete with the FS100, F3, or C300, the D7000's specs would lead you to expect it to show its best performance on this test. In my experience with the Nikon D5100, I can rely on it to deliver comparable noise and dynamic range at ISO 3200 as the GH2 at ISO 1600.

  • derekderek

    I have the zeiss 35mm ZF F2 and for some reason,the lumix Lents are more sharper than the zeiss one, in my GH2.

  • bitcrusherbitcrusher

    @NickBen it looks like a 85mm ZF F1.4

    The GH2 kills in the resolution but losing in the picture profiles. I really wish we had a flater setting.

    As far as low light the GH2 is not the king but still ok. Its not like I am filming vampires, if I was then I would get a FS100.

  • NickBenNickBen

    @bitcrsuher I agree with your point, we NEED details on lens settings for low light test. Until then, we are guessing in the DARK!

  • nomadnomad

    It's true, even the Epic is not as good as Alexa and F3 at low light. If the same lens was used in all tests, I don't care, you can stick a fast lens to any camera with interchangeable lenses.

    But point is: for any kind of planned shooting, we would take care of lighting. A doc shooter might need a FS100 with a fast lens, but for indie features the value for money of a hacked GH2 with a good lens is incredible. I'm quite relieved that the skin tones were not really so hard to grade. Maybe VK can pull some tricks to access better profiles to even improve on that. I like how the skin tones are not so blotchy after correction with the help of higher bitrates.

  • bitcrusherbitcrusher

    @NickBen

    A NEX5 with a Voightlander 50/1.1 Nokton?

  • NickBenNickBen

    This is an incomplete low light test, we don't have enough info yet.
    Did he shoot a low-light test at F2.8? If so, why?

    Yes, when sticking the SAME LENS at F2.8 in front of each camera, the GH2 is POSSIBLY a poorer performer at any ISO.

    There is a FLAW in the low light test so far- no camera looks good WITHOUT a lens. They all look bad. You must factor in APPROPRIATE LENS, not same lens when doing extreme test. I don't see any lens detail yet- hopefully that will change as he updates his post

    Now to REALITY, for $1000 you get the 25mm F0.95 Voightlander and now which is worst at same ISO setting? Why not use a Canon 85mm F1.2 for the low light test? With both lenses, then you better low light performance and resolution at the ISO setting on GH2.

    LENS speed is critical in a low light test, so not discussing it up front in detail is incomplete in my opinion.

    If this is a real-world camera body test (and lens), then tell me a combo that outperforms the GH2 with F0.95 Voightlander combination for under $2000?

  • derekderek

    gh2 is not perfect camera,4/3 sensor not help in low light,red epic is also bad in low light

  • rockroadpixrockroadpix

    Does anyone know why the Canon 5D's footage during the skin tone test was banding more than the others? It seemed to be the case on my screen.

  • shriggshrigg

    I'm not disappointed in the GH2 low light test either. That was a very extreme torture test, any shoot of mine that matters will have adequate light. Of course, journalists and documentary shooters may have different low light requirements. Wonder if Smooth -2 -2 -2 -2 would have been less "baked in" than Nostalgia for the skin tones footage?

  • derekderek

    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

  • pvjamespvjames

    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.

  • rozrozrozroz

    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.

  • itimjimitimjim

    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.

  • derekderek

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

  • MarkVMarkV

    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..

  • OedipaxOedipax

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

  • derekderek

    part2

  • PixCanFlyPixCanFly
    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.
  • AriaAria
    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.
  • griplimitedgriplimited
    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.
  • DrDaveDrDave
    一畫勝千言
  • danyyyeldanyyyel
    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.
  • derekderek
    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$
Add a Comment