thanks for the test. Based on what I've seen so far, and taking only video mode into account, the hacked GH2 destroys the 5N in resolution, sharpness, Latitude, aliasing, moire, audio control, color, user interface and surprisingly, even in low light, with sexy sharp grain:) NEX5N wins in fast wide angle lenses(because of sensor size) and has 108060p. It would be interesting to compare the GH2 720p 60fps to sony 1080 60fps.
Were you serious when you said "soft is cinematic" ? :) I think what you meant was soft can be cinematic :)

>>and it’s aliasing heavy.>>

That´s a no-no in 2011...

- i found that he kitlens for my gh1 got me more aliasing than old analogue prime lenses, but then again, they were not as sharp.
in general i hope decreasing digital sharpness inside 5n and using not the sharpest lenses might help a bit...
- well i prefer the 70's look and for me the fader nd does help and not only in using lenses wide open
- i mean the strobing with horizontal pans, that has been discussed a lot, and seems to be divided into two groups, one is saying "thats 24p and learn how to shoot" and the others who compare with other 24p cams say "something strange is going on - perhaps oversharpening etc."

Will a hacked GH2 improve the highlight fall off and limited tonal gradation as depicted in the review?
Surprised that the Sony beats the 7d for stills quality.

@andres
A77, VG20, FS100, F3, F35, F65 are all bigger. Along with the price tag. The 5N is not to shabby for starting at $599 body only

I had bought a second GH2 6 months ago and sold it thinking that A77, EX7 or EX5N will outperform the GH23.
Time goes on and now I think I'm wrong ... All sonys appears to have more moire, less resolution and poor dynamic range ...
The only thing that can let me buying the 5N could eventualy be the HDMI live at 1080-60P and plug a nano recorder ... which seems to be impossible at all ...

Many thanks for all EOS :-))

nice low light.. good job sony..

I think some are just too analytical...its down to the look your after,ergonomics and uses.
APS-C sensors give a different look and feel to M4/3rds...in many cases I prefer the "look" that that the sony brings.

The GH2 has great video qualities...but lets be blunt here...its a poor stills camera....Its not great with skintones either....and the battery life pisses me off.

On one end you have guys who want to see the farthest reaches in super fine super high bitrate resolved detail...on the other you have the same guys complaining about halo's or oversharpening or videolook and finding ways to reduce it for that "film look".

I had a Nex 5 and it never really bothered me in realworld shooting with moire/alaising...and videos looked just as sharp as my GH2 footage on my 50" and matched well.

Biggest gripe with sony is lack of high quality AFFORDABLE lenses...999 dollars for a 24mm f1.8 zeiss or otherwise is a bit of a stretch in my book.

As for the video..hard to compare when its using two different lenses (If I read right in the past the samyang outperforms the canon L FD so this might explain the corner sharpness difference)

One thing, how "bad" is the aliasing? I had a 7D but sold it because of the extreme levels of aliasing and moire. I've never had any problems with GH2 with it. How is the Sony in this regard? I understand there's more, but could you possibly post a test? A Canon can't shoot a brick wall or water, but I'm ok with some (for example the FS-100 showed some moire and aliasing in Phillip Bloom's test, but it was more than manageable).

Also, is it true that the EU version is only 25/50p?

Ah damn! And I had issues with it in 1080... But yeah, some real-world tests would be great (things like carpets and brick-walls would be wonderful).

@EOSHD: Absolutely! There was however a reason I felt more or less nothing but hate when I sold my Canon... There were so many parts that were rendered unusable because of bad aliasing or moire... But again, it will be fun to see how this camera handles! I love the picture from it and with that low of a price, it might still be worth it...
Basically, as long as the aliasing is manageable I'm ok with it, as the moire seems to at least not be a problem (and that I think is a much larger issue on a Canon).

EDIT: After looking at your footage, the aliasing seems to be manageable. Again, the biggest problem I feel with Canons comes from the moire, which I see very little off in these tests!

For now (early days) in my opinion it definitely has a dynamic range advantage.

It surprised me also how much cleaner the shadow detail is on the 5N at 24Mbit compared to the GH2 44Mbit and AQ 4 (Chris Brandin's setting). Look in the bottom left hand corner of these test shots... I have adjusted levels to extenuate visibility of what's going on the lows, this is not directly off the camera. I exposed to just about protect the very bright highlights on the book in the sun, base ISO. Cinema Gamma mode on GH2 and Portrait mode on 5N.

GH2 left, 5N right, click to enlarge

Come to think of it, what exactly IS going on in the lows on the GH2!? What causes the heavy macro blocking - a lack of data from the sensor? Maybe @cbrandin can explain?

@EOSHD
No, I said that phrase IS in the review and that's why I used it and Stefanos said I should use it.