Menu
What's new
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!

GH1 samples on DP Review

bradhusick

bradhusick

Active member
I just looked at the picture samples of the GH1 on the DPReview website and I am quite unimpressed. They all have an overprocessed, soft look that almost looks like a "soft focus" filter was used. I am not sure if this is due to the settings that were used or the inherent quality of the camera and lens, but if this is what we can expect, I will be saving my $1500. Looking forward to more information.
 
M

milapse

Guest
It's probably just the lens... Sort of reminds me of the Nikon 18-200. A sort of swiss army knife not a razor.

I'd reserve judgment until we see some results with primes strapped on... Have you seen this sample video with a summilux 25/1.4 vs the kit? Gives you an idea what quality glass is all about. (don't forget to hit the 'HD' button!)
 
P

pentacon6

New member
bradhusick said:
I just looked at the picture samples of the GH1 on the DPReview website and I am quite unimpressed. They all have an overprocessed, soft look that almost looks like a "soft focus" filter was used. I am not sure if this is due to the settings that were used or the inherent quality of the camera and lens, but if this is what we can expect, I will be saving my $1500. Looking forward to more information.
Click to expand...
I think it is better to specify which picture shows the soft look you mentioned. For me, the pictures show reasonable sharpness as the sensor
are relatively smaller than some APS-C or FF size DSLR. And as Milapse said, may the high zoom power lens relate to this matter.

If you need something even sharper than this, I think Nikon D3X is your only choice so far. It is definitely the sharpest image producer in DSLR world, excluding the 645 digital format. You can try to find some samples from 5D Mark II or Sony A900 to compare with the image from GH1 in 100% zoom.
I dare to say that the image from GH 1 is comparable to both of them if right lens is used. I have used both of them, as a G1 user. :toocool:
 
Terry

Terry

New member
bradhusick said:
I just looked at the picture samples of the GH1 on the DPReview website and I am quite unimpressed. They all have an overprocessed, soft look that almost looks like a "soft focus" filter was used. I am not sure if this is due to the settings that were used or the inherent quality of the camera and lens, but if this is what we can expect, I will be saving my $1500. Looking forward to more information.
Click to expand...
Hmmmm....Can you give some examples of photos you are objecting to so I can get a better sense? The sample galleries generally have no processing (other than standard settings if processing raw). You can generally pull them off the website and play with them on your computer to see if you can get them to your liking.
 
Y.B.Hudson III

Y.B.Hudson III

New member
I agree with bradhusick...as far as image Qu@lity is concerned...a definate Lack of micro-contast. But, I can't wait to slap some g00d gLass on that puppy...I think it will sing...
 
D

Diane B

New member
Being that they are jpegs without any PP, etc., don't you think even with the kit lens they could be much better shot in RAW with even the most cursory processing?

Diane
 
R

Ranger 9

Guest
Has anyone looked at the video samples yet? They're short, but I thought they were pretty impressive, especially considering they already had gone through a quality-reducing conversion from AVCHD Lite to mp4.
 
Y.B.Hudson III

Y.B.Hudson III

New member
Just speculation, but I think there is some marketing madness hidden in the lens software...You might be right...Diane B





regards hudson
 
D

Diane B

New member
TEBnewyork said:
The key attribute of the lens is silent focus for the video crowd. The videos do look good.
Click to expand...
I thought so also. I've been following the videos on Vimeo and for someone without any video knowledge at all LOL--they sure look good (and I follow the 5DII's also) with the camera in the right hands. I don't imagine Simon is a video person (I could be wrong), but these are quick clips--and look pretty good for that. Personally, I don't care for long zooms--but can see that many do and the video crowd will like it--and as Terry has said--its been optimized for video primarily--at least from all the info that has been coming out since it was announced.

Diane
 
bradhusick

bradhusick

Active member
Here's a quick comparison between the GH1 and the Canon T1i (both using kit lenses - the canon lens used here is the really cheap 18-55 priced at $155). These are JPEG 100% grabs from the DPReview site samples. Notice the difference in sharpness and microcontrast. Sorry about the rotation in the T1i image, but also note this is close to an edge of the image, not the center as in the GH1 image.

GH1 left, T1i right...
 
Last edited:
R

Ranger 9

Guest
Since they're different objects, shown at different scales, I can't tell if there's any significant difference in sharpness (let alone rule out whether any differences might be caused by the sensor, the lens, Canon's typically aggressive use of USM...)

And since they're not very textured surfaces, I can't tell anything about microcontrast either.
 
bradhusick

bradhusick

Active member
Okay, but that's all we have for now. Go look at the GH1 samples for yourself and see what you can determine, if anything.
 
Brian Mosley

Brian Mosley

New member
I don't think these samples do the GH1 any favours - I'm looking forward to getting a hold of some raw files... and trying some sharp lenses on it.

I'm already happy with the G1 image quality (using a decent raw processor and Olympus ZD lenses) - I expect the GH1 to be even better.

1/320s f/8.0 at 14.0mm


Kind Regards

Brian
 
bradhusick

bradhusick

Active member
Macro contrast is the ability of a lens to render black areas very black and white areas very white. A lens with poor macro contrast will scatter (or flare) light from the bright areas to the dark areas, hence rendering the dark area lighter and the light area darker. In the dark area, there will be no texture present, just a slight density present in the negative where it should be clear (black is reproduced as clear in the negative). The light area is likewise slightly darker due to the flare, because some of the light has been robbed from it and sent into the dark areas of the image.

Micro contrast is the ability of the lens to differentiate between adjacent areas of the image that differ only very slightly from one another in contrast - hence rendering very fine textural detail in both the highlight and shadow areas of the image. Due to excessive flare, poor macro contrast can thus adversly affect micro contrast as well as creating the aforementioned problems in an image.

-- Jack Flesher ([email protected]), October 02, 2001.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top