The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

GH2 impressions

Terry

New member
What do any of you think of the Panny Leica 14-150 on the GH2? (vs. the Panny 14-140?). Or how about the Oly "Super High Grade" lenses - those seem like the cream of the crop, although really expensive.
I owned the lens and sold it....argggh only thing I didn't like was the zoom creep. It is sharper.

I do have a Leica R 180 f2.8 so that is fast 360mm. Not sure it can take a converter.
 
Yes, 'tis true about the IS and certainly would not work for the longer lenses - although I usually turn off IS anyway with big lenses since a high shutter speed is really more important when shooting wildlife or other action sports and that trumps any IS. But I wonder about their other super-duper lenses, like the 14-35 f2 at $2300? Actually an older design, but I wonder if anyone here has ever used it with a Panny G series camera - although not as long a zoom range as the 14-150 obviously I would think it might be a killer lens on a GH2. Of course there is also a Panny Leica 14-50 that I've not seen much written about - anyone try this lens on a GH1 or 2? So many choices these days!

Lens creep on the 14-150 ey? Not a good thing when pointing down for sure. I guess that must have been enough of an issue for you to have sold it in favor of the 14-140 - do you feel this was normal for this lens, or just your copy? I would think with the price difference that the PL would have been a much better lens, but not always...
 

emr

Member
I just wish I could really give my brand new GH2 a try some day. Over here at 64°57' N it's dark when I go to work and it's dark when I come back. During the weekend it was possible to see some daylight, but it was too cold to go outside. But what I have noticed so far is that inside it is not very usable to shoot handheld (auto ISO up to 3200) with the slow 14-140mm zoom. Perhaps I should've bought that K-5 after all...
 

Terry

New member
Yes, 'tis true about the IS and certainly would not work for the longer lenses - although I usually turn off IS anyway with big lenses since a high shutter speed is really more important when shooting wildlife or other action sports and that trumps any IS. But I wonder about their other super-duper lenses, like the 14-35 f2 at $2300? Actually an older design, but I wonder if anyone here has ever used it with a Panny G series camera - although not as long a zoom range as the 14-150 obviously I would think it might be a killer lens on a GH2. Of course there is also a Panny Leica 14-50 that I've not seen much written about - anyone try this lens on a GH1 or 2? So many choices these days!

Lens creep on the 14-150 ey? Not a good thing when pointing down for sure. I guess that must have been enough of an issue for you to have sold it in favor of the 14-140 - do you feel this was normal for this lens, or just your copy? I would think with the price difference that the PL would have been a much better lens, but not always...
The Olympus 4/3 lenses I've been considering are:

50-250mm which can take a converter.
150mm f2.0 (gets me 600mm f4 with 2x converter)

On the wider side, there are rumors of a Panny 12-50mm f2.5-3.3 I will wait and see if this comes to pass.

Uwe- burst was my original concern. Something I will have to live with. Fast burst equals big camera which equals big glass.
 

Terry

New member
I just wish I could really give my brand new GH2 a try some day. Over here at 64°57' N it's dark when I go to work and it's dark when I come back. During the weekend it was possible to see some daylight, but it was too cold to go outside. But what I have noticed so far is that inside it is not very usable to shoot handheld (auto ISO up to 3200) with the slow 14-140mm zoom. Perhaps I should've bought that K-5 after all...
For indoor shooting the 20mm lens is a good addition to your kit.
 

emr

Member
For indoor shooting the 20mm lens is a good addition to your kit.
Terry, you are probably right. However, my plan was really to get a one lens solution for traveling and walks and not have to deal with the lens changes like with a DSLR. But silly me, I should've realized that the zoom is pretty slow and if the usable ISO is up to about 3200, one can't expect wonders.
 

ustein

Contributing Editor
>Uwe- burst was my original concern. Something I will have to live with. Fast burst equals big camera which equals big glass.

Use short bursts is my advice.
 

Tesselator

New member
I haven't had time to see the shootout yet, but it's logical that larger sensors have some advantages, at least as long as the photosites are larger. However, from a practical point of view, the GH1/2 offer a lot more than lower price and the possibility to mount more or less any lens.
Yeah, that's what >I< said. :)

To start with, they have a viewfinder. Although the Zacuto viewfinder and similar solutions work ok, they don't beat a proper viewfinder, and with the Panasonic, this comes in combination with an articulated LCD.
True but anyone actually doing it will be wanting live-view on an external monitor - that's a bit of the prerequisite. The GH1 doesn't have it. The GH2 may but I seen visual confirmation of this yet. So here the GH1 looses out once again. EVFs are OK for PJ acquisition footage but it doesn't really cut it for indy film-making or most other professionally minded applications. The GH1/2's built-in tilt/swivel monitor does go a long way toward this however - so it can be used. It's just a tad small.



redrockmicro


Mark Mann of Travis Fox


Alan Gordon

etc.

The camera body is much smaller and lighter, and you can easily fit 2 x GH2 within the weight and size of a 5DII. That comparison even holds for the price, and if really small is needed, it's easy to add a GF2. There is no GF2 in the full frame world.
Here, no one serious cares - at all. All DSLRs are orders of magnitude lighter than professional video or film cameras. In fact any serious videographer will tell you that heavier is better. The "I wanna ultralight" crowd is composed of almost only still photographers wanting a travel cam, a second BU cam, or who are coming at it from a RF background and are in love with that form factor.



Lenses are much smaller, particularly when it comes to telephoto lenses, but the same goes for WA lenses. I have on several occasions been shooting together with photographers using a D3s with Nikkor 14-24mm. The size difference is so enormous that it looks silly.
Yeah, I think lens|body balance is more important than just lens size/weight tho. If it balances well it handles well and video results will often show it. I partially agree on this point but again, this is mostly only important to still photographers of soccer moms etc. That said there are tons and tons of alt lenses that are about the same size as the Lumix line and almost all of them blow away the Lumix lenses in IQ. Remember that even for the M4/3 mount if you want a very fast lens at 50mm and over you will be paying for it in size and weight. ;-)

For people working in a studio or with a large crew, this isn't very important, but for small crews on the go, or one-man-shows like myself, it's of paramount importance. I can carry two GH bodies and 6 lenses in a small Kata Kata DR-467i backpack that also has space for 3-4 days of clothing, a fluid head and a small tripod on the outside.

I don't know how dramatic the quality difference is, but I do know that there are many places where I would never carry full frame gear, simply because it's to bulky and too heavy. In addition the difference in reaction you get between pointing a D3s with a 200mm lens at people compared to a GH1 with the OM 100mm is enormous. People simply act differently when a big camera and lens is pointed towards them, and that affects the real qualities of the video.
Most people shooting video with the APS-H/C or FF say it's not much of an issue. I do hear still photographers agreeing with you tho. If you're shooting serious indy the audio gear alone demands a car. So there's no big difference between the 10 extra pounds and the ever so slightly bigger back that carrying the same in FF gear will require. And again that's only for the logistics. When actually shooting; heavier is better! There's even weights that pros buy in order to increase the weight of their gear. ;^)

As far as the response one gets doing candid shots I can't believe there is any difference between the GH1 and something like the K5. From a distance they (and the Nikons and Canons) look identical. No one will be saying to themselves: 'Oh look, that camera is 9mm narrower and 6mm shorter so I don't need to be nervous'. Unless they are a camera buff they probably will not think about video al all if you're holding a DSLR in your hands. Then again everyone even a little bit serious will be using an external monitor, an external mic. and have it all mounted on a shoulder, riffle, or chest rig so the size of the camera kinda disappears altogether. :)



Robert Batta


Eric Thompson


"One Dog" Dan Filbin

etc.
etc.

So, the best isn't always the best, and although we are discussing technical quality on this thread, it's important to remember that the technology has to work within a context. Horse for courses and so on.
I can't agree with that. This sounds like you're trying to convince yourself or sell yourself on this idea. Of course the pro and semi-pro world of videography is all about the (IQ) quality of the footage and only that. Of course actor ability, set, props, sound quality, and lighting is critical too but we're in the camera forum so we're only talking about the video. Besides connectivity and a few other things almost no one besides casual hobbyists or light weight PJ people cares much at all about form-factor. There are plenty of PJer and hobbyists out there tho so if you're talking about them then I agree but for them they don't typically care all that much about the (IQ) quality of the footage either. I was describing and talking about pro and semi-pro videographers and indy film-makers. They care only about IQ and logistics are formulated around the equipment they need to achieve the best they can afford rather than trying to select equipment based on the size of their current backpack or what they think might be more inconspicuous at their friend's birthday party. ;)

I think we're just talking about two completely different types of users. :toocool:
 
Last edited:

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Well,
This summer will be interesting for me. I will be on Safari with a friend and we will be sharing the same vehicle. She will be shooting Canon 1DMIV and 5DII with 70-200, 100-400, and 800mm lenses and I will be shooting GH2's with 100-300 and 14-140. May look and see if I can find some other interesting glass and certainly she will have longer reach for birds but I am pretty comfortable that the kit I'm putting together will serve me well and be a whole lot easier to transport!
This will be a very interesting comparison. I think, the GH2 will do pretty nicely against the Canon, especially if you combine it with some of the other 43 glass. Looking forward to your findings!

Meanwhile I will buy the 100-300 and 7-14 myself.
 

Terry

New member
Peter - I've had the 7-14 and it is fantastic but don't completely rule out the Oly 9-18. It is tiny and good. I plan to take a small camera (probably GF2) with me in addition to the GH2's. My small camera kit has a 20mm plus the two collaspible Oly lenses.
 

Tesselator

New member
I like the 7-14mm lens for it's FL. But perspective buyers should be informed: The lens displays a massive amount CA that the camera's "correction" is unable to completely remove. There are alternatives for about the same price that are much better in several regards - although you're sacrificing AF if that kinda thing is important to you.
 

Amin

Active member
Amin - I'm not shooting a GH2.
Well,
This summer will be interesting for me. I will be on Safari with a friend and we will be sharing the same vehicle. She will be shooting Canon 1DMIV and 5DII with 70-200, 100-400, and 800mm lenses and I will be shooting GH2's with 100-300 and 14-140. May look and see if I can find some other interesting glass and certainly she will have longer reach for birds but I am pretty comfortable that the kit I'm putting together will serve me well and be a whole lot easier to transport!
I'm psychic, and I didn't even know it! :D
 

Terry

New member
I like the 7-14mm lens for it's FL. But perspective buyers should be informed: The lens displays a massive amount CA that the camera's "correction" is unable to completely remove. There are alternatives for about the same price that are much better in several regards - although you're sacrificing AF if that kinda thing is important to you.
What camera and RAW developer are you using? Seems well under control when used on a Panny camera with a RAW developer that makes the corrections.
 

Terry

New member
I'm psychic, and I didn't even know it! :D
LOL. I ordered it after that post. :p
I went back and looked at safari photos from photographers whose work I like (eg. Andy Biggs). When I went through their galleries and picked my favorites, for the most part they are landscape photos that have animals as a feature not as much close-up animal portraits. The net effect of that discovery took a lot of pressure off coming up with the really long lens solutions and airline carry-on restrictions of some airlines/countries.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
I think we're just talking about two completely different types of users. :toocool:
I think so too. In my part of the world, I see news and travel videographers using increasingly smaller gear (or should that be decreasingly?). The portability makes it possible to move fast and be where things happen without bringing an army of sherpas to carry the stuff, and it makes it possible to shoot on short notice, before the action ends.

Yes, size matters. With a camera the size of a GH1, things don't look too "serious", and often I can get the shot or the footage before people even notice that I'm shooting. That can be the difference between getting "daily life in village x" and "three Asians smiling towards the camera and showing the infamous V".
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
I like the 7-14mm lens for it's FL. But perspective buyers should be informed: The lens displays a massive amount CA that the camera's "correction" is unable to completely remove. There are alternatives for about the same price that are much better in several regards - although you're sacrificing AF if that kinda thing is important to you.
What alternatives?
 

kwalsh

New member
I like the 7-14mm lens for it's FL. But perspective buyers should be informed: The lens displays a massive amount CA that the camera's "correction" is unable to completely remove.
Really? I've seen essentially none with a Panasonic body and LR and I use this lens quite a bit - often in strong contra light where I'd expect to see residual CA if it existed.

There are alternatives for about the same price that are much better in several regards - although you're sacrificing AF if that kinda thing is important to you.
What do you recommend? I'm happy to skip AF, size and performance being more critical. I'm not aware of a lot of non-43/m43 zoom options down at 7 to 8mm besides the Sigma 8-16.

Ken
 
Top