Personal View site logo
Make sure to join PV on Telegram or Facebook! Perfect to keep up with community on your smartphone.
Please, support PV!
It allows to keep PV going, with more focus towards AI, but keeping be one of the few truly independent places.
AG-AF100 vs. GH2 final round
  • Brian202020Brian202020
    I hear on this forum, and in others, people constantly saying one is better than the other. I personally own both and am willing to do a test. It might be a week or two before I'll have time to do it, but I will do it, preferably with advice from people on this forum and others.

    I ask, is there any links you can post of people that already have done a test with these two camera's? I'd like to see what others have done before I do mine.

    I want to test only image quality. That seems to be what people are always bickering about. We all know the benefits of SDI, price, ND, smaller size, and which camera has each benefit. It's the image in question.

    All tests will be done with the same lenses. I think 5 different camera configurations are needed to do the test correctly. Here are the 5 I'm thinking.
    1. AF100, 24p, with Abel's "RANGE" settings, AVCHD.
    2. AF100, 24p, with Abel's "RANGE" settings, ProRes via external recorder.
    3. GH2, 24p, best high latitude settings, stock.
    4. GH2, 24p, best high latitude settings, highest quality yet reliable long GOP hack.
    5. GH2, 24p, best high latitude settings, highest quality yet reliable I-frame only hack.

    What are the preferred high latitude settings for the GH2? As for what hack settings to use, I'm open for suggestions as well. I'm leaning toward cbrandins 66mbps AQ2 and Driftwoods latest 176mbps version.
  • 35 Replies sorted by
  • Brian202020Brian202020

    No update. Been busy with work and family. Plus I'm beginning to think the test is pointless.

  • imdjayimdjay

    any update?

  • olegkalyanolegkalyan
    Finally I put together a little test, have both cameras, actually two GH2 hacked to the latest Driftwood masterpiece.
    AF100 brighter about a stop, less contrastier. I couldn't figure out what setting to put GH2 to. Tries cinema, nostalgic, for some reason GH2 always look quite noisier at iso 400, actually there was a Nikon 5100 by the side, that looked quite similarly to GH2 with much more moire, at bright straight lines.. I had to lower the pedestal to -5 to compensate the difference in exposure and raise the contrast on AF100, to look similarly to the other two.
    Surprisingly DD was higher on AF100, getting details in shadow areas..
    My assistants were beside me to conform my findings.. video results quite soon!
  • stoneystoney
    I'm just saying newer m43 lenses mitigates the skin tone issue of GH2. It doesn't eliminate the yellowish or greenish or bluish skin tone entirely, but it looks better.

    GF3 gives much better skin tone than GF1 where they share same sensor. Hmmm. I guess there are many factors affecting the final color.
  • LPowellLPowell
    I'm puzzled by this lens coating discussion. Regardless of what it's coated with, how could the same lens cause a yellowish color cast on the GH2 and a pinkish color cast on the AF100?
  • stoneystoney
    I thought it was weird, too. The zoom has more complex optic structure, but it did gather more lighting than the prime. There was 1/3 stop EV gain reading from the camera when I was testing it out.

    image
    "Nano Surface Coating minimizes reflection through the entire visible light ange (380 to 780nm)". I took that as more lighting through the lens. The only downside of nano coating over multi coating was less aesthetic lens flare.
  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev
    >One thing about nano coating. 14-42X gathered 1/3 stop more lighting than 14mm pancake. I love X

    Sounds weird.
    All modern multicoatings are different only slightly.
    Plus you have more air-glass pairs in zoom.
  • stoneystoney
    @LPowell I think both used 14-42.

    @kazuo I think lens coating, sensor, and image processing all contribute to skin color.

    GF3 + 14-42X gave skin tone closer to AF100's. GF3 < G3 < GX1 in terms of skin tone color. We wouldn't need to worry about skin tone from upcoming new m43 cameras.

    Older models get benefit of X lenses, too. Nice skin tone from GF1... I mean GF1!!!! Olympus 45mm 1.8 gives good skin tone, too.


    One thing about nano coating. 14-42X gathered 1/3 stop more lighting than 14mm pancake. I love X.
  • AdRAdR
    I'd like to see a comparison between AF100 HD-SDI and GH2 on green screen, and in color grading. I'd expect that the 4:2:2 Prores from a Samurai would key better than 4:2:0 AVCHC from the GH2. Also interested in seeing how far you can push them in color grading before they start to get ugly.
  • AriaAria
    Meh, I think the GH2 looked great. What was going on with the skin tones on the girls arms in the AF100 footage? That looked terrible. There is this pink hue that doesn't look right at all. The GH2 had a slight resolution edge to me as well. I don't think there was enough of a difference in image to be honest. Depends on your needs. For a person who does his own projects i'd stick with the GH2.
  • kazuokazuo
    @Stonebat
    Yeah, Stonebat is spot on the lens coating. It has nothing to do with the sensor I reckon, cos i recently did a shoot using a Zeiss 50mm / 1.4, and a Rollei 50mm / 1.8 and the Rollei produced images that had a significantly more pronounced green cast. I did a search on line, and found out that although both are Planar lenses, Rollei does produce a more sandy tone.

    So I would think it's down to the coating and make of the lens, and how the glass resolves colours.
  • LPowellLPowell
    @stonebat
    I assumed the same lens was used on both GH2 and AF100 footage?
  • stoneystoney
    1st gen m43 lenses show greenish and blushish skin tone. Leica DG and Lumix X have nano coating, and they give better skin color. The only difference is lens coating.
  • LPowellLPowell
    @mozes
    Thanks for posting the link to the YouTube comparison by Schrott Film. In the scene with the rainbow boots, the girl's skin tone was yellowish on the GH2 side. I think this indicates that the GH2's green channel was too hot, which you can also observe in the silver spoon's greenish tint (on the right side of the frame at 0:36). I sometimes shoot with an M-5 adjustment in the Smooth Film Mode to compensate.

    The AF100 side looks good for the most part, but I did notice macroblocking smudges in the grass at the lower left corner of the rainbow boots shot. Looks like the GH2 did a cleaner job of handling that scene.
  • ShieldShield
    I thought the AF100 always looked better than the hacked GH2, especially low light indoors. Using the 14mm on both, and setting the gain to 3200, the AF100 was noticeably brighter, like 1-2 full stops. But the color profiles didn't match exactly; I used "standard" on the GH2 and a custom "clean" scene file.
    But, I don't shoot for $$$, and the AF100 didn't look $3k better. :)
  • alcomposeralcomposer
    @Shield
    You mention that the AF100 was "out of the box" better, what was your feelings regarding the hack on the GH2,.. did it lift it to AF100 standards? (quality not usability)...
  • ShieldShield
    I owned both the AF100 and GH2 for about 2 months. The Af100 footage was better out of the box, and offered many tools that the GH2 just doesn't, like focus peaking, white balance button, ND filters, other exposure assistance features, and a screen that doesn't shift when you hit record.

    But I sold the AF100 and kept the GH2. Why? Two reasons - stealth of the GH2, and the ETC mode. Oh, and the cost of the AF100. So 3 reasons.
  • Brian202020Brian202020
    Sorry guys, I've been on hiatus for a little while. Work got insanely busy and with family obligations and Christmas shopping, I just ran out of time. I'm still interested in doing a test soon. I need to come up with an external recorder to borrow for the AF100.
  • mozesmozes
    http://www.google.nl/search?client=opera&rls=nl&q=gh2+vs+Af-100&sourceid=opera&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&channel=suggest#client=opera&rls=nl&q=gh2+vs+Af-100&oe=utf-8&channel=suggest&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=nl&tbo=u&tbm=vid&source=og&sa=N&tab=wv&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=f51657f5ceacaff2&biw=1276&bih=893
  • mozesmozes
    GH2 vs. AG-AF100/101 - in 4k - Panasonic Micro FourThirds prueba тест 檢測 のテスト
    Geüpload door handysheriff op 18 sep 2011
  • mozesmozes
    Panasonic GH2 mounted on top of an AF100 with the same lens on both
    Geüpload door TexasMediaSystems op 21 dec 2010
  • griplimitedgriplimited
    That's because the government agents of Panasonic forbid such an act. Users and testers have since gone missing from such an attempt.

    In reality, we know what the GH2 is capable of and it's limitations are. If we wanted the $4.5k AF, we'd buy it and put it to use no doubt. Although everyone here seems to be satisfied with their GH2.
  • danyyyeldanyyyel
    The gods are against us, I think we will never see the gh2 vs Af-100 comparison. I don't know how many time I have heard about such attempt that never took place.
  • bwhitzbwhitz
    @alcomposer

    Haven't found anyone with a AF-100 yet... :(

    ...and I'm too broke at the moment to rent one. But, if anyone in the LA area has a AF-100 and wants to do the shootout... I'm still game.
  • alcomposeralcomposer
    @stonebat
    Exactly
Add a Comment