GH2 good for low light 2 plus hour shoots?

Martyn Hull · May 19th, 2011, 12:46 AM

The Canon HF-G10 is getting good comments from owners and its low light is said to be very good.

Jeff Harper · May 19th, 2011, 08:15 AM

Large 1/3" sensor, focus ring, good call Chris (Martyn). It appears it would be somewhat better in low light than the Panasonic 1/4" chip.

It does look nice, but there is no Shutter Priority, which is a glaring defect. Overall it does look great.
David, I think this Canon might be a real contentder.

I have to admit it is very expensive for what it is.

Martyn Hull · May 19th, 2011, 09:09 AM

Jeff the shutter can be manually controlled but that is not what you call shutter priority ?

David Horwitz · May 19th, 2011, 04:58 PM

Thanks for the tip on the Canon. I was thinking though if we go with Canon I'd probably rather spring for the XA-10 because it has XLR ins. We'd have to spend almost $200 anyway to get the JuicedLink or whatever, and that's getting pretty close to $2000. My guess is the XA-10 is better anyway so why not just pay a little more and get that one? I've seen a low light video with the XA-10 and I think it looks very good.

And Brian, thanks for the information. Very helpful. I'm wondering though about not being able to adjust ISO while shooting, especially since these will be 2 plus hour continuous shoots. Is that just a firmware issue that could be fixed? But either way I don't know if I'd want to buy the camera and not be able to adjust that setting while shooting.

Another thing is that we'd definitely need an AC adapter and someone said you can't really get one at the moment. Any thoughts on that?

And I guess my final question is would a follow focus work with the stock lens? Or would we have to purchase an additional lens too?

Chris Hurd · May 19th, 2011, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martyn Hull

The Canon HF-G10...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Harper

It does look nice, but there is no Shutter Priority, which is a glaring defect.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martyn Hull

the shutter can be manually controlled but that is not what you call shutter priority ?

Manual shutter and shutter priority are two different things. The difference is that shutter priority forces
the camera to use auto iris. With manual shutter, the iris can be manual as well (a full manual-everything
mode, in other words).

However, the Canon VIXIA HF G10 *does indeed* have a Tv (shutter priority) mode, as described on page
56 of the HF G10's operator's manual. I'm not sure why anybody would think that it did not have this, as all
Canon camcorders offer Tv mode.

We have a separate forum for Canon VIXIA camcorders, so please take any further HF G10 conversation
to Canon VIXIA Series AVCHD and HDV Camcorders Forum at DVinfo.net -- meanwhile let's keep this
conversation centered on the Panasonic GH2, please. Thanks in advance,

Colin Rowe · May 20th, 2011, 02:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Harper

Yes, you are right, the model is the TM900, sorry about that! HMC 40 is an older model now that I recall. Here's the first thing that popped up when I did search. They say it is sharper than the HMC-150, according to Colin Rowe, who loves his.

UMBRIA - FONTI DEL CLITUNNO [ Panasonic HDC-TM900 Test 1080/50p ] videos - by Youtube Video Script

Hi Jeff, think you have me mixed up with someone else, I have never used an HMC-150 lol

Jeff Harper · May 20th, 2011, 05:32 AM

Actually Chris, we've been boucing around with other models too, as the original poster was considering using a GH2 for a job that some felt was not a good fit, but you are correct, we've been off topic from an forum point of view.

I watched a CNET video review that slammed the cam on the lack of Tv mode, so if you know differently, then I stand corrected. I can't believe they would make such a mistake in a review, but it wouldn't be the first time it's happened, I've been misinformed by reviewers before. She claimed there was Manual and Aperture priority only.

Colin, I thought you had said you read others saying that the smaller chipped Panny was sharper, my mistake. I didnt think you owned the 150, but regardless I shouldn't have invoked your name that way, sorry.

Colin Rowe · May 20th, 2011, 07:24 AM

Hey, no problem Jeff

Jim Snow · May 20th, 2011, 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Harper

I watched a CNET video review that slammed the cam on the lack of Tv mode, so if you know differently, then I stand corrected. I can't believe they would make such a mistake in a review, but it wouldn't be the first time it's happened, I've been misinformed by reviewers before. She claimed there was Manual and Aperture priority only.

I have seen too much of that. Aside from poor understanding of a product they are reviewing, some reviewers have a heavy bias toward competitive products and it shows sometimes.

Jeff Harper · May 20th, 2011, 10:00 AM

Well that was what was strange about the review, in retrospect. She seemed to really like the camera, and was spot on about the price being high for what it is, but she was real specific about the lack of Shutter Priority mode, and if she was being biased, I didn't see it, but I know what you mean exactly Jim, I've seen that in reviews also.

Anyway, I am loving my cameras, and am less ansty about using them, but they are certainly a challenge.

Chris Hurd · May 20th, 2011, 10:26 AM

Well, my apologies for once more continuing off-topic, but just to put it to rest, here's a screen grab of the Canon HF G10 operator's manual. The blatant inaccuracy of the CNET review convinces me that we need to expand DV Info Net more deeply into the higher-end consumer realm.

Click to see it big...

Jim Snow · May 20th, 2011, 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

The blatant inaccuracy of the CNET review convinces me that we need to expand DV Info Net more deeply into the higher-end consumer realm.

I wholeheartedly agree with that, With some of the newer consumer products, the line between pro and consumer is not always as obvious as it used to be.

Jeff Harper · May 20th, 2011, 10:48 AM

Chris, as I believe you are a dyed-in-the-wool Canon user from way back, I never doubted your claim, and understood CNET was likely mistaken as soon as I read your post.

I consider you to be pretty much an authority on these cameras, so your word was good enough for me

On the other hand, it is absolutley unforgivable that the reviewer could make such a mistake, and then belabor it so.

Furthermore, it sounded SO peculiar and absolutely made no sense that Canon would have left it off.

Anyway, the original poster has at least received the correct information, and can now make an informed decision when debating between the Panasonic TM700 and this Canon.

Chris Hurd · May 20th, 2011, 10:54 AM

I sure didn't mean to go on about it -- I should have included that screen grab in my earlier post. It's one thing to say a source is wrong and know that most folks will take your word for it, but that's certainly not definitive proof by any means. The image from the manual verifies it though.

Jeff Harper · May 20th, 2011, 11:01 AM

No Chris, at least we know what is true and what is not. Thank you!

May 19th, 2011, 12:46 AM	#16
Martyn Hull Major Player Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: England Posts: 444	Re: GH2 good for low light 2 plus hour shoots? The Canon HF-G10 is getting good comments from owners and its low light is said to be very good.

May 19th, 2011, 08:15 AM	#17
Jeff Harper Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 8,425	Re: GH2 good for low light 2 plus hour shoots? Large 1/3" sensor, focus ring, good call Chris (Martyn). It appears it would be somewhat better in low light than the Panasonic 1/4" chip. It does look nice, but there is no Shutter Priority, which is a glaring defect. Overall it does look great. David, I think this Canon might be a real contentder. I have to admit it is very expensive for what it is. __________________ "The horror of what I saw on the timeline cannot be described."

May 19th, 2011, 09:09 AM	#18
Martyn Hull Major Player Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: England Posts: 444	Re: GH2 good for low light 2 plus hour shoots? Jeff the shutter can be manually controlled but that is not what you call shutter priority ?

May 19th, 2011, 04:58 PM	#19
David Horwitz Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Los Gatos, California Posts: 109	Re: GH2 good for low light 2 plus hour shoots? Thanks for the tip on the Canon. I was thinking though if we go with Canon I'd probably rather spring for the XA-10 because it has XLR ins. We'd have to spend almost $200 anyway to get the JuicedLink or whatever, and that's getting pretty close to $2000. My guess is the XA-10 is better anyway so why not just pay a little more and get that one? I've seen a low light video with the XA-10 and I think it looks very good. And Brian, thanks for the information. Very helpful. I'm wondering though about not being able to adjust ISO while shooting, especially since these will be 2 plus hour continuous shoots. Is that just a firmware issue that could be fixed? But either way I don't know if I'd want to buy the camera and not be able to adjust that setting while shooting. Another thing is that we'd definitely need an AC adapter and someone said you can't really get one at the moment. Any thoughts on that? And I guess my final question is would a follow focus work with the stock lens? Or would we have to purchase an additional lens too?

May 20th, 2011, 05:32 AM	#22
Jeff Harper Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 8,425	Re: GH2 good for low light 2 plus hour shoots? Actually Chris, we've been boucing around with other models too, as the original poster was considering using a GH2 for a job that some felt was not a good fit, but you are correct, we've been off topic from an forum point of view. I watched a CNET video review that slammed the cam on the lack of Tv mode, so if you know differently, then I stand corrected. I can't believe they would make such a mistake in a review, but it wouldn't be the first time it's happened, I've been misinformed by reviewers before. She claimed there was Manual and Aperture priority only. Colin, I thought you had said you read others saying that the smaller chipped Panny was sharper, my mistake. I didnt think you owned the 150, but regardless I shouldn't have invoked your name that way, sorry. __________________ "The horror of what I saw on the timeline cannot be described."

May 20th, 2011, 07:24 AM	#23
Colin Rowe Major Player Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Cornwall UK Posts: 793	Re: GH2 good for low light 2 plus hour shoots? Hey, no problem Jeff __________________ Colin

May 20th, 2011, 10:00 AM	#25
Jeff Harper Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 8,425	Re: GH2 good for low light 2 plus hour shoots? Well that was what was strange about the review, in retrospect. She seemed to really like the camera, and was spot on about the price being high for what it is, but she was real specific about the lack of Shutter Priority mode, and if she was being biased, I didn't see it, but I know what you mean exactly Jim, I've seen that in reviews also. Anyway, I am loving my cameras, and am less ansty about using them, but they are certainly a challenge. __________________ "The horror of what I saw on the timeline cannot be described."

May 20th, 2011, 10:26 AM	#26
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,366 Images: 513	Re: GH2 good for low light 2 plus hour shoots? Well, my apologies for once more continuing off-topic, but just to put it to rest, here's a screen grab of the Canon HF G10 operator's manual. The blatant inaccuracy of the CNET review convinces me that we need to expand DV Info Net more deeply into the higher-end consumer realm. Click to see it big... Attached Thumbnails __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

May 20th, 2011, 10:48 AM	#28
Jeff Harper Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 8,425	Re: GH2 good for low light 2 plus hour shoots? Chris, as I believe you are a dyed-in-the-wool Canon user from way back, I never doubted your claim, and understood CNET was likely mistaken as soon as I read your post. I consider you to be pretty much an authority on these cameras, so your word was good enough for me On the other hand, it is absolutley unforgivable that the reviewer could make such a mistake, and then belabor it so. Furthermore, it sounded SO peculiar and absolutely made no sense that Canon would have left it off. Anyway, the original poster has at least received the correct information, and can now make an informed decision when debating between the Panasonic TM700 and this Canon. __________________ "The horror of what I saw on the timeline cannot be described."

May 20th, 2011, 10:54 AM	#29
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,366 Images: 513	Re: GH2 good for low light 2 plus hour shoots? I sure didn't mean to go on about it -- I should have included that screen grab in my earlier post. It's one thing to say a source is wrong and know that most folks will take your word for it, but that's certainly not definitive proof by any means. The image from the manual verifies it though. __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

May 20th, 2011, 11:01 AM	#30
Jeff Harper Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 8,425	Re: GH2 good for low light 2 plus hour shoots? No Chris, at least we know what is true and what is not. Thank you! __________________ "The horror of what I saw on the timeline cannot be described."