@bwhitz - a camera with three 1920x1080 sensors can easily resolve a 1000 tvl picture when shooting HD format. That's why the XF300 can do it, as well as the EX3, HPX250, PMW350, HPX3100, and a bunch of other full-raster 1080p camcorders. The GH2 cannot. I posted a sample in the other thread that clearly demonstrated that the XF300 can resolve more detail than the GH2. If you can't see the difference, it's because you're choosing not to; it's very clear. I estimated the GH2 at approx 800 TVL based on how it compared to the XF300 and what i know about that camera's resolving power - i.e. over 1000 TVL. Contrary to what you might believe you know about me, I would love for the GH2 to be able to resolve 1000 TVL. But it doesn't. You're the only person i've ever come across that says that it does. But your claims aren't supported by any other available test here or any other forum or website, and it's not supported by my own test. This isn't a conspiracy, it's just quantifiable data. If you're in LA, i'd be happy to meet up and test with you so you don't keep going on about every forum member on every camera site being a bunch of old sour grapes trying to protect old camcorder investments. You know that's not the case, and if you really believe it... Well, there's no sense in trying to convince you otherwise. But here's an idea - if you want to prove everyone wrong, then just shoot a test chart! Show us that HD video from a GH2 can resolve more than 1000 TVL! I want to believe, i really do - but the funny thing about faith is that it doesn't make facts any less true.

@johnnym - yes i saw that. That's what got me curious, and that's where i posted my own results. I had good light, low iso, excellent lenses set to sharpest apertures, and a subject with extremely fine detail. I posted my center crop samples along with settings data. Why would you think my test was faulty and not bwhitz's, which was done in bad light, on a scene where there wasn't a lot of very fine detail, and we don't know what the settings were?

@johnnym - My comparison is in the same thread as bwhitz's, a little further down. 1:1 center crop shots of a US $20 bill.

I'm not trying to put an emphasis on resolution here. I just wanted to know how the gh2 performed. I don't care what the numbers are, i'm still dp'ing a feature in January with 2 gh2's. It gives fantastic images regardless of measurements. I just don't think incorrect data should be presented as fact, i.e. that the GH2 is a 1000 TVL camcorder, when the overwhelming majority of independent test results show otherwise.

@danyyyel - i'll have a resolution chart after the holidays, i'll run another test then.

@cowpunk52 ok, it will settle the argument.

Also, was the landscape shot filmed at 1080p on Philip Bloom's page? Because in that instance, the C300 is clearly resolving more detail.

bla bla bla

@bwhitz I think you just need to do some side by side test by just shooting some high detail scene, better in low iso because we want to see them at their best (if else someone wouldsay that the iso noise is higher in one or the other. post the result in full 1080p png files. As the chinesse say a picture says more than a thousand words.

"a camera with three 1920x1080 sensors can easily resolve a 1000 tvl picture when shooting HD format. That's why the XF300 can do it, as well as the EX3, HPX250, PMW350, HPX3100, and a bunch of other full-raster 1080p camcorders. "

@cowpunk52 Um....I don't think you are explaining this correctly. None of these cameras have 3 sensors. They have one 3CCD sensor that takes separate readings of red, green, and blue values for each pixel as opposed to a single CCD camera. And...just because a camera is 3CCD does not necessarily mean it can resolve 1000 lines. But...I do believe the EX-1 is rated at 1000 lines. I've read some testemonials in the past (I forgot where) that it resolves better than the EX-3.

As far as the GH-2's resolving power.....I believe it's very close to the Sonys (on paper) but not quite as much. BUT in real world shooting it shows a bit different. I think it all depends on the shooting situation.

I agree with @bwhitz about viewing these DSLRs as like different film stocks. I mean...film is film....but not all film stocks resolve the same...or even look the same. So, why is it that we all get so worked up about DSLRs vs....whatever?

Also, I've seen examples of EX-1/3 footage showing some form of aliasing in the past. So it's not just a CMOS thing (though I understand where it comes from with CMOS cameras). And yeah....even the more expensive CMOS cameras like the Red, F3 etc. all have aliasing. I only bring this up because it seems like people who like to put DLSRs down always use that issue as a way to seperate DSLRs from the "big boys." I also found it funny that those same people never use the GH-Xs in their argument. Fact is these Panasonic cameras do an excellent job in controling that issue.

......what were we talking about again..... Oh yeah....Dynamic Range between GH-2 and 7D. How did we end up here?

@Ian_T - actually, i am explaining this correctly. All of those cameras have three sensors, and each of those sensors have 1920x1080 photosites. Which is why they are known as 3 chip camcorders with 3 chip sensor blocks. It's really super easy to confirm this: just go to the B&H product page for the Canon XF300. Notice the part in the description where it says that the camera has three native 1920x1080 sensors? Yeah, there ya go. But how can this be? How does such voodoo work? Very simply - In 3CCD or 3MOS camcorders, a beam splitter separates a signal into three different versions of the same image - one showing the level of red light, one showing the level of green light and one showing the level of blue light. Each of these images is captured by its own chip - but each measures the intensity of only one color of light. The camera then overlays these three images and the intensities of the different primary colors blend to produce a full-color image. A camcorder that uses this method is referred to as a three-chip camcorder, and because it doesn't need to do a bayer interpolation like a single sensor has to do, it's typically able to resolve extremely close to it's native resolution. The RED and F3 have aliasing and moire because they are single cmos sensors that have to do a bayer interpolation of their red, green and blue pixels on the sensor. It's impossible for those cameras to produce an image that resolves the sensors native resolution, and so some information is made up, and that's why aliasing is sometimes referred to as 'false detail.' The GH2 has to do a bayer interpolation too (which is why it will also alias and moire given the right detail frequency), then downsample that to a 1080 video signal. However, perhaps due to processor horsepower or encoding algorithm or some other reason, the video resolution is not as good as a proper downsample from the "5k sensor." Anyone can test this very very easily: take a 16MP raw still and a 1080p video of the same high detail subject or scene. Downrez your GH2 raw still image to 1920x1080, then compare it to a video frame grab from the same scene. Post your results.

Also, we ended up here because a question was raised regarding the validity of a resolution chart shot with a GH2 and posted on another forum. One poster here stated that it was not accurate because the chart poster was just trying to protect his $40,000 2/3" camcorder investment. I stated that it was accurate given my similar findings with the GH2's ability to resolve detail in HD video.

@Ian_T yeah, the trick is the downscale. A bayer chip can usually resolve at max about 80% of it's native resolution. If the downscale is done with the proper processing from a suitably oversampled sensor, then it should be able to resolve as much as a native 1080p 3-chip camcorder. But it's very difficult to resolve more than 1000 TVL in the HD format, because there are only 1080 vertical pixels in the frame. Also, downscaling is no simple task - just try and do a straight conversion from HD to SD and see how much aliasing you get! I'm thinking a fair amount of anti-aliasing or blur is applied during the encode process of the GH2's video which results in it's softer than native resolution, but that's pure speculation. In a perfect world we could get a 3-chip S35 sensor block at HD or higher resolution, but that would probably result in a very large camera!

DR for video of course.

@magnifico - i'm going to try hard to get a hold of a backlit stoufer chart before i start shooting a feature in January. I would very much like to know this information as well before i get neck deep into production.