GH2 / 14-140 seems to good to be true for documentary

[Ben Edwards]

Originally Posted by Kevin McRoberts

It's also not ideal for handholding. I can with ample support, but once I add the weight and bulk of a rig, I may as well just roll on the AF100 or a similar camera better suited to the job.

The GH3 addresses many of the drawbacks of shooting with the GH2, aside from the small form and single audio input.

Thanks for the reply. You mention the AF100, do you not use Panasonic lenses with it, from what others have said there seems to be a lack of parfocal and fast lenses for the GH2 so I am a bit confused as to why the AF100 is a good solution for docs & factual?

Bem

[Ben Edwards]

Thanks everybody for taking the time to reply. I am thinking that if I jump ship it will be to the GH3, not sure if the GH2 is worth it. The main thing that is making me nervous about leaving the Canon camp is there seems to be a real lack of fast/parfocal glass for the Panasonic ecosystem. Canon has quite a lot of L lenses that can be got for under £2000 used and some quite crazy lenses like the 18-270 (not over sharp but sharp enough and can be a godsend).

My other option would be get a used GH2 body, an adapter and have a play around with my canon lenses.

Can someone point me at a good GH3 review (for video).

Regards,
Ben

[Bill Bruner]

Ben - I think you would get the best result by making the jump to the

GH3

 

GH3

. The

GH2

 

GH2

has served me very well, but the

GH3

 

GH3

takes hybrid still/video cameras to the next level. Here are, in my view, the three best reviews of the camera. All are of cameras with pre-production firmware

GH3

 

GH3

video review from The Camera Store in Canada. They are great guys - I bought my GH2 from them a couple of years ago:

Panasonic GH3 Hands-On Field Test - YouTube

And from Luminous Landscape: Panasonic GH3 Field Review

Regarding lenses, the

12-35

 

12-35

and

35-100

 

35-100

are not the only fast glass in the

GH3

 

GH3

's lens ecosystem. There are also the great Zuiko lenses for the 4/3 format, easily adapted with the

Panasonic MA-1

 

Panasonic MA-1

. Lens compatibility chart here: http://panasonic.jp/support/global/cs/dsc/connect/gh3.html

Autofocus and autoexposure work on these lenses, and they are terrific, high quality glass. I shoot with the

Olympus 11-22 f2.8-3.5

 

Olympus 11-22 f2.8-3.5

and http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/463442-REG/Sigma_581107_18_50mm_f_2_8_EX_DC.html. My next 4/3 lens will be the

£1073 Olympus 50-200 f2.8-3.5

 

£1073 Olympus 50-200 f2.8-3.5

.

You may also want to look at the highly regarded Olympus

14-35

 

14-35

and

35-100

 

35-100

f2.0 lenses, each for less than £2000.

Here is the

GH2

 

GH2

with the

Oly 35-100 f2.0

 

Oly 35-100 f2.0

taking on a RED Epic (please watch at 1080p):

YouTube

Again, hope this is helpful.

Bill
Hybrid Camera Revolution

[Kevin McRoberts]

Originally Posted by Ben Edwards

Thanks for the reply. You mention the AF100, do you not use Panasonic lenses with it, from what others have said there seems to be a lack of parfocal and fast lenses for the GH2 so I am a bit confused as to why the AF100 is a good solution for docs & factual?

Bem

I use a mix of lenses. My two main close-to-mid zooms are Panasonic: the Panasonic 12-35/2.8 and the Leica 14-50/2.8-3.5. I think they compare well to the Canon 24-70 and 24-105 in terms of range and speed. While the Canon zooms may be somewhat sharper, the video imaging (with current EOS DSLR's) definitely isn't. You have to step up to the 1DX, C100 or C300 to see whatever optical advantage they may have over the PanaLeica glass... and even then, it may be more a function of the sensor.

In quick & dirty jobs where there's plenty of light, minimal setup times, but many changing shooting distances, I still get plenty of use from the kit 14-140 lens. The range is good and the slowest speed (f5.8 on the long end) isn't unworkable.

Adding in a Panasonic 35-100/2.8 is an eventual budgetary goal, as this lens is also parfocal, reasonably fast, internal focusing with AF, OIS, and so forth. Most of my work isn't at these ranges, so it hasn't been a priority.

In a pinch, you can use anybody else's lenses... so something like a Nikon 17-35, 17-55, 24-70, 80-200 and others will yield a little less range, a lot more size, but with the proper adapter (Metabones, MTF, or others) you'll get a smooth-zooming, smooth-focusing fastish lens with the bonus of a clickless aperture (by way of the adapter). There is thus no lack whatsoever of good zooms for the m43 system.


Moving onward, why the AF100? It's simply a more professional self-contained setup with things like excellent sync audio (which I can monitor and adjust while recording), 2 discreet input channels, exposure and focus aids, switch-on-the-fly ISO and WB, timecode, VFR, best data rate in more than one framerate, etc. With the 14-140 it exposes and handles pretty much like an HVX with better DR and less noise but no servo zoom and less tele range. With fewer external devices and connections, nothing gets bumped, twisted, or undone in mid-shoot.

But again, for many jobs that only need good 24p visuals, maybe even with just simple nat sound or impromptu single-mic interviews, GH2 works very very well.

[Jeff Hinson]

Bill...
Im impressed with the Angkor documentary....what great work !

Made me realize I don't need the GH3....at this time. The GH2 is capable of much more that Ive been able to deliver. Maybe Santa will bring me a lens or two. ha

Thanks for sharing that....and Happy Holidays.

Jeff Hinson

[Bill Bruner]

Thank you, Jeff. Yes, the

GH2

 

GH2

continues to be a wonderful camera. I bought the

GH3

 

GH3

because I absolutely needed the headphone jack, rain resistance and 1080/60p - and it has been worth it, but I'm keeping the

GH2

 

GH2

.

Gotta sell something, though. My house is starting to look like something out of an episode of "Hoarders".

Blessings of the holy-days to you and yours!

Bill

[Ryan Douthit]

Just tossing it out there, since I recently shot a documentary with the Sony A77 (I won't link it here out of consideration of the GH3 group.) The kit lens that comes with the Sony Alpha A77 is a 16-50 f/2.8 APS-C parfocal design. The camera has in-body stabilization for this and any lens you attach. I'm now using this lens on both my A77 as well as my FS100 and it's an amazing piece of kit for video use. I wouldn't be surprised if it was designed first and foremost for video use.

Now, the A77 has other issues, such as lack of a headphone jack, and heavy aliasing on wide detail shots, but it is a very usable run-and-gun documentary camera. It's my understanding that aliasing isn't as much of a problem with the GH3 and, of course, the GH3 has a lot more video-ready features.

A friend of mine just bought a GH3 so we may be doing a little comparison soon, between his camera and my A77 and FS100 (why not?)... which is why I am checking out threads in this forum today, but I saw your thread and thought immediately of the DT lens.