GH2+14mm f2.5 samples

[Rawfa]

The GH2 still doesn´t seem to match the NEX system high iso wise, but you can see an improvement regarding the GH1.

P.S - People insiste in making high iso tests with good light. What is the point? If you have good light you´re NOT going to need high iso.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/1010/10100806panasonicgh2142p5gallery.asp

http://translate.google.com/transla...html&hl=en&lr=lang_en&tbs=lr:lang_1en&prmd=iv

 

[meilicke]

The shots inside the restaurant with the black chairs was not that great lighting wise. The performance looks better than the G1, that is for sure. I would take the 1600 any day, maybe the 3200. 6400 is pretty dodgy.

-Scott

 

[Rawfa]

The shots inside the restaurant with the black chairs was not that great lighting wise. The performance looks better than the G1, that is for sure. I would take the 1600 any day, maybe the 3200. 6400 is pretty dodgy.

-Scott

My thoughts exactly. I could maybe see 6400 in BW with A LOT of post work in small print.

 

[meilicke]

My thoughts exactly. I could maybe see 6400 in BW with A LOT of post work in small print.

I wonder what the 6400 (or 12800) would look like in dynamic B&W. Maybe interesting.

-Scott

 

[Vivek]

The Sony A33/55 are going to make the GH2 look not that attractive in terms of general performance and in particular high ISO image quality.

That plus the cost differences (GH2 is rumored to be about 899 Euros while A55 ~755 Euros which will drop by about 100 Euros within 2 months) is going make the GH2 even less attractive.

 

[meilicke]

The only thing attractive to me about the u4/3 cameras is the ability to accept older lenses. In my case, I have about half a dozen Canon FD lenses. This goes back to my earlier waffling over G1 vs NEX 3/5. I want the G1 body with a NEX sensor and registration distance.

More and more I am tempted to just pick up a used G1 to use for the next year or so while I wait for a better body (for me). Maybe I'll just go to the gym.

-Scott

 

[Vivek]

I want the G1 body with a NEX sensor and registration distance.


-Scott

You are not alone!

I will buy a few,no, I will pre-order them even through Neiman Marcus.

BTW, it appears that the Pana 20/1.7 would cover the NEX sensor (barely). A shame that it has no focus possibility or an aperture ring.

 

[meilicke]

You are not alone!

I will buy a few,no, I will pre-order them even through Neiman Marcus.

BTW, it appears that the Pana 20/1.7 would cover the NEX sensor (barely). A shame that it has no focus possibility or an aperture ring.

Yes, but I am not sure I would pay $17.5 k for one, even if it does have a fancy leather wrap.

 

[biglouis]

I thought the performance of the camera was superior to the lens. The high iso shots look considerably better than my GF-1 at equivalent iso. In fact, I think the iso6400 is about the iso1600 on the GF-1.

I am quite disappointed by that lens, though. It has poor edge definition wide open (expected, I suppose except that the 20/1.7 works well down to f2). And even stopped down it looked poor - could be camera shake?

In fact, it makes me wonder if a u4/3rd camera can handle wide angle lenses. I am seeing exactly the same poor definition that I see when I mount a wide-than-50mm lens with an adapter on my GF-1. If I am honest, the results from the 7-14 are acceptable but not marvellous.

Anyway, perhaps whoever is taking the review pictures is not a particularly good photographer - in any case I'd want to see a lot more examples before committing to the 14/2.5

LouisB

 

[photoSmart42]

The only thing attractive to me about the u4/3 cameras is the ability to accept older lenses. In my case, I have about half a dozen Canon FD lenses.

+1.

 

[Vivek]

Louis, Good thoughts. :thumbs:

One thing I would add is that with wider and wider lenses, one has to move closer and closer to the subject to be effective.

Standard random shots of pavements from the standard 2 meter distance would not cut it.

These are the people who have had access to the gear and that is what Pana gets in return.

 

[Jonas]

So, do I understand everything right:

The camera is expensive crap, the lens is poor and the photographer is outright lousy.

?

/Jonas

 

[Vivek]

No, not at all.

(I might get a GH-2 when the prices go down due to competition from Sony)

Pana might have made extraordinary efforts to eek out everything in this format (all indications are there) but it still lags behind the competition.

The lens specs are fabulous and I will not give up on it easily based on couple of the "reliable sources" whom we know where they will point the camera (regardless of what they have) because it is a run of the mill review.

(And, yes, I would like to see the 14/2.5's price to be reasonable- i.e. on par with standard 28/2.8 AF lenses from other systems)

 

[MRfanny]

would have liked to have seen more "low light" shots. Gotta say though I would be over the moon if my GH1 could shoot as clean as that at 3200 let alone anything over 800.

 

[biglouis]

So, do I understand everything right:

The camera is expensive crap, the lens is poor and the photographer is outright lousy.

?

/Jonas

No, not at all. I complimented the high iso performance of the camera in my post. I'll definitely upgrade to a GF-2 if it has this sensor/processor. However, the actual image quality in terms of edge to edge sharpness, which I assume is a function of the lens, not the sensor, is not as good as I anticipated. I was expecting 20/1.7 performance but I'm not seeing it. Giving the lens the benefit of the doubt, it could be the photographer.

LouisB

 

[biglouis]

would have liked to have seen more "low light" shots. Gotta say though I would be over the moon if my GH1 could shoot as clean as that at 3200 let alone anything over 800.

+1 if they include this sensor/processor in the 'GF-2'

 

[Jack]

More and more I am tempted to just pick up a used G1 to use for the next year or so while I wait for a better body (for me).

Re the GH2, I agree totally. I picked up an extra G2 during the recent fire sales as everybody abandoned ship for the NEX and A55. I do like the G2's menu arrangement and think it and the finder improvement are well worth the upgrade cost FWIW. Anyway, I find ISO 1600 color and 3200 in Dynamic B&W quite excellent out of the G2/GF1 for my needs, even at 12x16 print size --- and I rarely ever need higher ISO than that for my shooting.

Re the 14 -- certainly did not see anything overly exciting either. Kind of bummed, was hoping it would be "spectacular"

Re the NEX/A55, I'm honestly not seeing enough of anything that would cause me to abandon the Panny's, at least yet.

My measly .02 FWIW only...

 

[retow]

The Sony A33/55 are going to make the GH2 look not that attractive in terms of general performance and in particular high ISO image quality.

That plus the cost differences (GH2 is rumored to be about 899 Euros while A55 ~755 Euros which will drop by about 100 Euros within 2 months) is going make the GH2 even less attractive.

Tried the A33 yesterday. With the kit lens it's compact and light weight. But with a decent lens (I had the sales rep mounting the Zeiss 16-80mm) it offers no size/weight advantage over entry level DSLRs.
I think the mfts' strength is decent size/weight plus decent sensor coupled with decent glass resulting in well rounded and good overall packages. So the sum of the parts still ads to a quite competitive total.
I went to the Sony store with an itch around my credit card, but left without pulling it.

 

[Vivek]

The same- size/weight- can be said of the G1/2, GH1/2 as well. They are not all that smaller compared to A33 or most entry level DSLR- pretty much all of them will beat m4/3rds hands down when it comes to image quality.

It is a different matter when it comes to video shooting. Here, A55 could still better the GHs.

Once the NEX becomes usable (EVF, decent swivel LCD, useful buttons/menu), the Gs will look even more overpriced for what they can offer.