@WhiteRabbit
Both the VGA and HD mode in mjpeg crashes. That is if you do continuos fast panning. It will looks very motion blur on camera LCD then stop recording.

oh, this has so much magic, but the downsides are big.
i just wish we would be able to change avchd to anamorphic benefits somehow.
i have my 2x kowa ready at my closet ;)

Again, thank you for the further information, @johnnym. Yes, I have tested both AVCHD 1080p24 24H and MJPEG HD and VGA with the anamorphic. With AVCHD 1080p24 24H anamorphic recordings, I apply a height transform in the NLE, value of 100 down to 56, it looks correct aspect, and yes, a very wide image. I just prefer the look of AVCHD recordings at this stage.

Interested to learn if @Vitaliy can explore AVCHD aspect ratio adjustments in PTool in subsequent releases, although it may not be as beneficial coming from 16:9 mode.

@johnnym, thank you very kindly for your reply and explanation. I will read a few times and try and assimilate this information.

MJPEG VGA appears mostly correct with my Isco (2160/810=2.66). However, I am leaning toward AVCHD, curious to learn if AVCHD 1080p24 24H can be manipulated to be 1920 x 720 (1920/720=2.66)? If so, increase data rate of recording, no height transform in NLE, perhaps other benefit? Just a thought, @driftwood?

@driftwood, Quantum Beta 4 observations:
Isco Cinemascope Ultra Star 65mm (front half end of projector lens)
Using a San Disk 32GB 30MB/s HD Video SD card. Works fine with SeAQuake, not spanning, of course.

MJPEG - HD setting = 2048 x 864 recording.
Applied a reduction to the height value 100 to 70 in NLE, image now appears correct.
Records well, no drops outs, a few basic shots of my children in the room, house lights on in the evening.
Colour rendition of MJPEG appears closer to skin tones, as opposed to AVCHD, MJPEG may have less of that green/yellow tinge in skin tones, 2500K WB for all mode tests. As mentioned by @Oedipax, there is an obvious harshness to MJPEG recording. Further, as @johnnym has mentioned, above, perhaps the resolution is not really there? Perhaps the noise in the image is making it appear sharper, yet lacks resolution? I do not have a resolution chart, so I can not conduct any crude comparison tests. That said, it is amazing that yesterday I was capturing some clips at 2560x1080 out of this amazing little hand held camera, the GH2.

MJPEG - VGA setting = 2160 x 810 recording.
Image mostly correct aspect, perhaps I could apply height variation from value 100 to 105 in NLE, image appears correct.
@gh2hacked, you mentioned recording fails, was it this specific VGA mode for you too, or all modes? Only this one failed for me everytime. I tried some rapid pan/tilt for a few seconds, but recording soon failed when settling down and pointing at talent. Again, all indoor lighting, evening time.
@driftwood, if you increased the data rate on this one with the tweaks in Quantum Beta 4, then perhaps we may need to drop the rate a little?

AVCHD 1080p24 24H setting - 1920 x 1080 recording.
Applied a reduction to the height value from 100 to 56 in NLE, image now appears correct.
I am leaning towards the view that AVCHD is preferred, including anamorphic use. Smoother less noisy image. Using my anamorphic Isco is proving a little soft for my liking. Only a few days experimenting, so I reserve further comments for now.

@driftwood, is it possible I make my own custom X and Y values in AVCHD, such as 1920 x 720, if so, how?

Thank you, @driftwood, et al.

@driftwood
Quantum V4 is not stable for fast pan motion on my test. Just test it out with my Sandisk 30mbs and it fail on fast repeated panning. Also does not playback on camera. Didn't even show clips info, just show a thumbnail. In Mjep, Is it common to see the remain time at 2minute when SD card is not full? Waiting for a stable in camera playback patch.

*** NEW BETA *** Quantum v4
Changed HD MJPEG to a step down in size for durability reasons: Big improvements further still on quality for both modes HD & VGA and high datarates not seen before. Anamorphic sizes are;-
720p30 width=2048, 720p30 height=864
480p30 width=2160, 480p30 height=810
If you change either size settting to 1920x1080 for non anamorphic users you're good to go with great looking footage. Appears very good actually but let me know :-)
2. Very slight improvements on 1080p24, 1080i, 720p.

Test away and report results.

Nick

@spacewig Also check out and read about the ISO bug, which on certain settings gives more noise due to the bug. People have identified methods of going up and down and which ISO settings work best. Do a search on the top right of Personal-View.

@proaudio4 Thanks for the quick reply. I wasn't aware of that, though I've spent hours reading here and elsewhere in an attempt to learn about the Gh2. I saw a youtube video doing a low noise test with driftwood's seaquake and there was a remarkable difference between his patch and stock firmware. There was no mention of post denoising. I assumed that the images were straight from the camera. Speaking of which, what is the preferred denoising software?

Cheers

Hello, new poster & GH2 owner.

To being with, immeasurable thanks to all those developing and testing new patches - you know who you are. I will be making a donation shortly. Also want to make it clear that my end goal is to shoot narrative film, not get caught up in pixel-peeping or attaining digital video data nirvana. But I appreciate the efforts of those who do.

I want to share the following observation: I did a low light test yesterday night to compare stock and Quantum. I was surprised that the stock firmware was less noisier. Anyone else have the same results? What patch is currently best for low noise, SeaQuake?

Thanks for in advance for any info/advice. Cheers.

@WhiteRabbit, thanks for all that great info! Not much to add yet as I haven't shot any anamorphic with Quantum beta 3 yet, but hopefully soon.

@Oedipax, my attempts to record AVCHD using an anamorphic attachment on the front of a long enough lens, say, over 50mm, has resulted in footage that looks rather soft. I recorded some footage out the window today, terrible dull grey sky, however, I was pleased with how much clearer the MJPEG footage was compared to the AVCHD I had previously recorded. I agree, the footage does have a 'harsher' look, whereas the AVCHD has been soft enough to remind my of my 35mm lens adapter days. It is great that the MJPEG footage is recorded without the need to transform the height (default value down from 100 to 56), as I do with the 1080p24 24H AVCHD footage. I will later try and find a few very short snippets and upload them to Vimeo or Youtube as comparison. I just now finished recording some potential 'skin tones' submissions, I want to look through that footage now. I will revert, as soon as practicable. Thank you.

@driftwood, Quantum Beta 3 MJPEG HD and VGA settings for this anamorphic experimental user are proving far superior to AVCHD 1080p24 24H. Using the correct San Disk 30 MB/s SD card, MJPEG HD was almost totally unstable, only a few records with lots of rapid pan/tilt at the start sustained. MJPEG VGA was fine. Truly amazing quality difference for anamorphic users, imo, yet not sure why such a defference, not sure how the magic under the hood makes it so much better. Any prospect of MJPEG 23.976p, 24p and 25p flavours? Thank you @driftwood, report will be on the way to you soon.