" I can record 1.5 hours straight with my 16gb SDHC cards. And I would trust it as a backup camera in the event my DSLRs were not operable or available. It's perfect. Plus, I will use it for personal photography and video while on vacations."


Curious, shooting 1.5 hours with the GH2 if you found it overheating and shutting down like the 7D as been known to do?

Jim, I forget why the other cams overheat, but that is not possible with the GH2.

I have run a GH1 for 2 hours, stopping only to change batteries, no problems.

Another thing about the size Jim. If you are using the camera (GH2) as a lock down, size is not an issue. Buttons not so much an issue, accidentally hitting things not an issue.

However, if you are shooting handheld, it's different story.It is nearly impossible to get through a session of run and gun without hitting a button by accident.

It happens most often when picking up the camera. If you pick it up by the correct side, you can easily hit the wb, iso, or f2 button, which I have done a zillion times. You almost have to pick it up with your fingertips, because it's the fleshy area on the hand below where your thumb is attached that hits the button.

It really is not suited for run and gun, but it will get me through till the next thing.

OK, here's a real serious GH2 temporary shortcoming: no AC adapter, anywhere! Listed on the Panasonic web site but no retailer in NYC has it even listed in their inventory except Adorama that has it as backordered. But they never have seen one.

Has anyone noticed the battery life while feeding a HDMI monitor? The same as using the LCD? Sort of need to know before Monday, I only have two batteries for a full day shoot.

I had to buy a GH2 for our company to shoot long lectures, and I have to say I really can't stand this camera. The menus are just completely annoying and non-intuitive, and why on earth would they only offer 24p at the hi-res setting?

I feel sorry for anyone who bought this camera for wedding work. My God... trying to run and gun with this thing must be a nightmare. Not to mention if you shoot in 24p good luck trying to get the footage to look good on DVD unless every single shot is on a tripod.

I think it's manageable for corporate work, but its shortcomings are too many to list.

I hate not to flog this dead horse, but I find the GH2 a wonderful tool for creating stunning images. I currently own a Panasonic HMC40, TM700, GH2 and Canon 7D. They all can create wonderful video, and are all different in respect to how I must operate them for best result. They all have issues that challenge my abilities, but for the most part, my shortcomings are what prevent these cameras from producing good video.

I do believe, at this point in time, we would be hard pressed to find another $900 camera that is as versatile and capable as the GH2.

Come on Dan, can't you think of ANYthing bad to say? (kidding of course!).

William, you will likely want to have some batteries over-nighted. The AC coupler is also not available, I've been waiting for it for awhile!

B&H does have the generic batteries which reportedly last longer than than the OEM versions. If you bought two or three of them you'd be in good shape, just take your charger with you!

Jeff, if you can't shoot 24fps for any reason, 720p is a perfectly acceptable mode for most work. We would all love to have 1080 60p, I am chief among them, but 720p is pretty darn nice with this camera.

Curious, shooting 1.5 hours with the GH2 if you found it overheating and shutting down like the 7D as been known to do?

Nope, it's never overheated at all. Jeff H is right that it won't. It was designed to better dissipate the heat.

I concur with the non-overheating issue. I've recorded up to 90 minutes continuous footage with no problems whatsoever. However, the only reason we use the GH2 is for the long recording times. Anything that doesn't require length, we'll use the Canon 5D, 7D or 60D.

The GH2 is clunky and difficult. I sum it up as being a dumbed down "consumer" camera that 'can' produce a professional image under the right circumstances, but it sure is a pain in the ass to get there.

I concur with the non-overheating issue. I've recorded up to 90 minutes continuous footage with no problems whatsoever. However, the only reason we use the GH2 is for the long recording times. Anything that doesn't require length, we'll use the Canon 5D, 7D or 60D.

The GH2 is clunky and difficult. I sum it up as being a dumbed down "consumer" camera that 'can' produce a professional image under the right circumstances, but it sure is a pain in the ass to get there.


I'm with you for the most part, Jeff. My only use for it is to record for long periods of time from the balcony so I don't have to tread up there every 10 minutes to stop/start it. If I'm running the camera, it's a 7D or 5Dm2. It's fully capable of being main camera, but the small size of the GH2 is the biggest hindrance for me, with the single dial for aperture and shutter speed coming in a very close second. Like I said before, I have respect for those using it for main camera at weddings, but I sure couldn't do it.

personaly i admit to canons edging it in skin tone but as an ex 550D/T2i owner its all it wins on, dont forget the canon resolution is like sd compared to the GH2s,if DVD is the required format that wont matter but for me who likes to finish with blu ray or avchd disc it matters.

I have 3 GH2's and 1 GH1. I used all four tonight to record a concert. 99 minutes of continuous non stop recording and not one of them overheated or crashed. Bulletproof.
A lot of you are complaining that it's too small? Huh? That's one of the cool things about it! I have FOUR cameras in my backpack now. FOUR!!! Imagine lugging around 4 EX3's? Btw, the GH2 is better in low light than EX3 with the stock lens. No comparison. I think the image is better too.

I do have issues with the menus.

Btw, one of my GH2's tonight had a $12,000 12-250mm lens on it with a Zacuto follow focus. Sweet. And next time I rent a Canon 200mm f2.8, I'll check to make sure it has an aperture ring. Duh.

B&H does have the generic batteries which reportedly last longer than than the OEM versions.

No generic batteries there as of yesterday.

Well, William, that stinks. It woud seem after your initial battery expires, you'll be using your charger. Sorry to hear abou that. In NYC one would think there would be ONE of those batteries somewhere!

No generic batteries there as .of yesterday.

I have one of them. They don't read out the battery life, but last real well. Price is right.

I am seriously considering not using the camera on Monday due to the battery issue. Fortunately I have other options and the shoot will be single performers against a photo black curtain so shallow depth of field is not a big, big need.

Brian, how long do you get with the generic? I have no idea how long they are good for and have been afraid to use them!

Brain, fully expect to see footage from your shoot, awesome, love to see it. You sound as if you are really enjoying the cameras!

All right, guys, I did my best to read through all 5 pages of posts, but if I missed anything...sorry.

Let me confirm and sum it up: The GH2 is no good for weddings/run and gun. If used for weddings, it should be coupled with a real video camera (not a DSLR or EVIL cam). Canon DSLRs such as the 60d/7d/5dii are much better than the GH2 for weddings/run and gun.

Does that seem about right?

I keep hearing that the GH2 sucks for weddings and needs to be paired with a real pro videocam for weddings, but not a lot of explanation as to why. Is it because the GH2 is physically too small in size that buttons get mis-pressed? Or are the people with this complaint saying all DSLRs, including the larger 60d/7d/5dii are still too small (when compared to a video camera)?

I'm curious why people are saying GH2 sucks for weddings? And why does it need to be paired with a video camera? Is it because the shallow DOF is hard to work with at run and gun/wedding situations? If so, then any DSLR would cause that problem including the Canons.

I'm trying to decide if the GH2 or the Canon 60d is better for wedding work.

Let me see if I can bullet point the pros and cons of the GH2 for weddings:

GH2 Pros:
-no recording limit (compared to the 12 min of the Canon DSLRs)
-no overheating
-triple core processors (outputs full HD resolution to an external monitor via HDMI)
-longer battery life (compared to the 60d, despite the 60d's battery having more capacity because the 60d's LCD screen sucks up battery juice)
-mirrorless
-virtually non-existent moire/aliasing (60d has bad aliasing/moire/rolling shutter)
-better rolling shutter control than 60d, but still present
-resolves at much higher real resolution than the 60d
-noticeably less noise than 60d
-60p at 1080, however it's then compromised by 1080i and 24p or something
-small form factor (apparently also a huge con)
-1:1 zoom crop without digital zoom
-2x crop factor (or more like 1.8 or 1.9x in reality because of the GH2 sensor is a bit unique for Micro 4/3 in that it uses a 16:9 aspect ratio)
-3D capable (though this is more of a gimmick, novelty feature I feel)
-can adapt older, but super high quality lenses (that are now considered vintage and really inexpensive to buy) that the 60d cannot
-strong continuous tracking autofocus with certain lens like the kit 14-140mm that lets it be easily used on steadicams (does this tracking AF work for the Canon EF lenses or other lenses?)

GH2 Cons:
-way too small - why is this an issue? because it's easy to accidentally press the wrong button?
-can't adjust ISO while recording
-can't adjust White Balance while recording
-can't adjust ETC? (not sure) what is ETC anyways?
-shutter and aperture settings can be easily messed up because they use the same button
-needs 2.5mm to 3.5mm adaptor for audio mic (though I will be using a Zoom H4N)
-far worse LCD resolution than the Canon 60d
-far less robust build quality
-not as good low light slightly compared to 60d (because of smaller sensor?)
-uglier aesthetically (imo)
-less "street cred" as the Canons seem to hold the "brand image" professional feel more; Lumix feels amateur - however, when it comes to video work, I believe the image quality is more important than street cred, and the GH2 IQ beats the 60d in virtually every video aspect
-hard to acquire AC adaptor
-hard to acquire camera body in general

60D Pros:
-way higher build quality, doesn't feel so plasticky (though it's not magnesium alloy either)
-bigger physically (seems to be the perfect size for my hands, the GH2 does feel too small for comfortable operation)
-far better LCD resolution
-has the better street cred and professional image to your clients
-normal 3.5mm audio jack
-slightly larger sensor (so slightly shallower DOF and I'm guessing better light sensitivity?)
-better stills camera (but far worse video camera in terms of image quality and feature set - physical controls and ergonomics are debatable)
-don't need adaptor for Canon EF lens and L lenses (though I hear there is an adaptor for the M4/3 that can not just adapt these Canon lenses, but also control the aperature...not just making the Canon aperature stuck on the default widest settings)
-possibly will get a stable Magic Lantern update in the future - though I'm still unclear what kind of feature set this would bring over the already existing feature set of the GH2? anyone care to explain?
-only 1.6x crop factor (though I hear in reality, it's more like 1.7x, whereas the GH2 in reality is 1.8 or 1.9x)
-better low light because of slightly larger sensor (not sure if it actually gives better low light)?
-doesn't overheat (compared to 7d) - so same as GH2

60D Cons:
-physically bigger (debateable - I find this to be a pro over the GH2 because it fits more comfortably in my hands)
-uses more battery power (esp. to power the LCD)
-12-min recording limit
-heavy aliasing/moire/rolling shutter compared to GH2
-fewer frame and recording formats (am I correct? I may be wrong about this point)
-does not output full HD resolution to external monitor via HDMI (and I for sure am using a Lilliput 8" 800x600 monitor)
-lower real resolution than GH2 at 1080p
-noticeably more noise than GH2
-cannot exit manual focus assist with shutter half-press like you can with GH2

Basically, it seems like the GH2 is better for video in virtually all aspects compared to the 60D, so I'm confused why people say GH2 is no good for weddings? Are you saying the GH2 in particular is no good for weddings, or are all DSLRs no good for weddings? Because I'm hearing the major complaint is that the GH2 is too small to use well for run and gun, with the buttons getting accidentally pressed, no on the fly ISO and WB, no AC adaptor, etc.

But the 60d, while larger, is still much smaller than most pro video cameras. Do you find that too small for weddings as well?

I don't really want to turn this into a DSLR/EVIL vs. video camcorder debate, because I love the AF-100 and NEX FS-100 too. I just want to understand when people say the GH2 is no good for weddings...why do they say that?

Btw, is it hard to cut footage from the GH2 together with the AF-100? With the FS-100? With the Canon DSLRs? Can they be color corrected to match nicely in post or in camera?

A few reviews I read along with this thread to gather this info as best I could. If I'm wrong about anything, please correct me.

Zhong, I think the statement that the GH2 is no good for wedding is wrong. A couple of people saying that doesn't translate to "people say". I like to use it in conjunction with my EX1R but that is just my personal style / choice. One thing to keep in mind on forums is that you need to filter comments because some aren't objective or qualified comments.

I think the GH2 is quite usable for weddings, but you must know what you are doing.

I'm committed to it, so I have no choice at this time.

On the other hand, the lens choices (without using adapters) with your canon are so much greater, no adapters needed, and not as much as a "crop" factor. the GH2 has more options, in fact, but with a Canon 60d you do not have to hunt other brands of lenses to get what you want, and you have the advantage of the huge Sigma for Canon line of lenses.

Everything on the GH2 is doubled, but not so with the 60D, correct? 50mm becomes 75mm, not 100mm, am I right? This crop factor is really too much, but can be seen as an advantage depending on how you look at it.

I strongly dislike the size of the GH2 for run and gun, it is too small. I have done several events with it, and it's like playing with a toy.

On the other hand, it is a very capable camera, and learning to overcome the obstacles is the primary challenge, and once that is done getting great images is certainly possible.

I would love to have a Canon 60d as a primary camera, and have considered it. Right now I'm sticking with the GH2 and GH1s, as I have four of them, and there is no reason I cannot make them work for my purposes.

One thing I have learned from running forum sites for twelve years: people use them mostly for complaining. The number of folks not having problems outweighs the number of folks who do, but those people tend not to post (presumably because they're too busy enjoying their new camera). Nobody calls the police to report having a good day.

It's not so much that you need a "real" video camera in addition to the GH2 at a wedding, but rather that having at least two cameras for coverage is ideal for cutting in post and fixing mistakes. A real video camera won't need to be checked on as often due to superior battery life, too. Also, it's good to have a camera that allows deep depth of field with low aperture values so you're not constantly adjusting focus, not necessarily at a wedding, but anywhere. Real video cameras are better for run and gun because you don't have a separate audio recorder to worry about, you don't need to screw on ND filters, you have a massive zoom range (although if you own the 14-140mm for the GH2 you're alright, although the Panny's zoom and focus rings aren't smooth, kinda gritty feeling).

Chris is correct, and of course there is the issue that the camera is new to virtually everyone that has it, so there will tons of whining about various aspects. The problems, as they are overcome, will be less an issue as the camera is accepted for what it is and it has become learned by the users.

So Patrick how did it go?

One thing I have learned from running forum sites for twelve years: people use them mostly for complaining. The number of folks not having problems outweighs the number of folks who do, but those people tend not to post (presumably because they're too busy enjoying their new camera). Nobody calls the police to report having a good day.

I agree, Chris. I personally love this camera. I find it way easier to use than the Canons, and after having just shot a music video using primarily T2i's (I had to use my cam one day due to an emergency), the footage from my cam blew away the T2i. The Canons aren't intuitive as far as having to menu surf for everything instead of having buttons/dials and going only a level deep into a menu like the GH2.

Jeff, I haven't done the wedding yet, it's at the end of next month. I was just saying in general.

As I mentioned above, I really like the GH2. The complaints in a way make a person more credible with their overall opinion of the camera. I remember when I was considering buying my EX1R, a person who's opinion I respect a lot included some criticisms with his overall high opinion. That made his comments more credible to me.

Right Patrick, it's at the end of the month, my mistake.

Thanks guys!

Yeah, I should have clarified that my question was directed at those with complaints with the GH2. Jeff Harper, it sounded as if you really didn't like the GH2 for weddings, yet were committed to figuring them out regardless of your qualms about the GH2.

So Jeff, your biggest qualms are:
GH2 is far too physically small, but you feel the Canon 60d would be a very useable size for weddings?
GH2 2x crop factor is a bit too much for wedding work (though to be fair, it's more like 1.9x in reality and the Canon 60d is more like 1.7x in reality)
GH2 menus and controls are hard to work with (can you expand on this please?)
GH2 shutter and aperature control use the same button, which can be easily mispressed

I am definitely not using one GH2 and nothing else. I do a three camera-shoot, so I'm trying to decide what those three cams should be.

I'm thinking right now: GH2, Canon 7d/60d, and Panasonic AG-AF100/Sony NEX FS-100/Canon 5d Mark II. However, I'm also concerned about cutting together the GH2 footage will look with Canon 7d/60d or 5dii footage. Leaning towards the AF100 because they are easier and cheaper to rent than the Sony FS-100, and since the Panny AF100 uses the same sensor as the GH2, I'm assuming they will match easily.

Obviously if I go with a real large sensor video camera (AF100 or FS100), that'll be my main camera, but if I'm going with three DSLR/EVIL cameras, then I was thinking of using the GH2 as my primary camera since it has far better resolution, less noise, virtually no aliasing/moire, 1:1 crop zoom, full HD external monitor output compared to the Canon 60d...oh and NO RECORDING LIMIT! Then I heard about these comments saying that the GH2 was too hard to use as a primary camera...and I wanted to know why it was too hard to use?

I'm also now hearing issues about the GH2 not outputing display info on an external monitor? Is that true? I would want to be able to see certain things like aperature setting, shutter setting, battery meter, audio level meters, etc. on my external 8" Lilliput monitor (800x600).

I have been using a Canon 5D Mk II for over two years & have had a GH2 for a couple of months so can talk with some authority on the pros & cons. For me the 5DII is simpler & easier to use plus it feels better in my hands but this is largely because I am so familiar with it & the GH2 is still relatively new to me. The 5DII is also simpler & easier to use because it has less features available than the GH2 e.g. no auto-focus, no ETC & simpler menus with fewer choices.

Most of the complaints that you have picked up on from this thread are really grumbles & irritations about design decisions that Panasonic made that we all think could have made the camera so much better if they had asked us before they put the camera into production:-) The single shutter/aperture wheel is irritating but that's all it's not a deal breaker but it could have been better. The HDMI monitor output only works in 1080 mode for some reason so it's irritating that it doesn't work in 720 mode again it's not a deal breaker but it could have been better.

The GH2 is no more difficult to use to shoot a wedding than a Canon DSLR & in fact has advantages in fact e.g. no 12 minute recording limit. In this situation both could benefit from use of a 'proper' video camera as a safety measure. The crop factor is neither better no worse than the Canons you just choose your lenses appropriately. The 2X crop factor plus ETC gives you a 'free' telephoto lens so that is one less to buy & carry in your bag. The 14-140mm lens can be used to cover the range for a 35mm full frame equivalent of 28-728mm (28-1092mm at 720p).

The bottom line is that the GH2 shoots video that is at least as good as the Canons & better in some regards as there less moire & aliasing with higher resolution, more detailed images.

Hey Zhong, That's not true that the GH2 and AF100 use the same sensor. The only thing they have in common is the same lens mount: m43. Other than that, they're different animals. To everyone's suprise, the GH2 actually produced a better image -- though the AF100 has some nice ergonomic features and built in stuff.

With regards to menus, one reason we hate them is that there is a mechanical dial on the top right with way too many positions, and each position, or most of the position have their own unique menus. So in effect, once you start flipping through the menus on the LCD the amount of choices become mind boggling. Ditto for the mechanical dial for the auto focus settings. For that reason, I limit myself the "M" for still photos and "M+camera icon" for video. I don't know what all those other settings on the mechanical dial are for -- a lot seem redundant, either way, they just confuse things. So now, the only thing that I have to be careful about is accidentally bumping that mechanical dial, which can send me in to menu he*l. And bumping a button inadvertently seems particularly easy on the GH2 because it's so dang tiny, so you really have to double check those dials, just pulling it out of the case can easily turn the dial or another mechanical setting -- there just isn't much real estate on the body.

I did a recent 4 cam shoot with 3 gh2's and 1 gh1, I had no issues. All four cams fit in my backpack and you can use flimsy tripods if you're locked down. You can even clamp mount them -- the GH2 body weighs only 1.1 lbs. My biggest problem is pimpifying them to make paying customers feel like they're getting their money's worth. I use rails, Cokin cheapy matte box system, bolt my Tascam to the rails to make them think it's part of the camera, whatever it takes to create the illusion of value.

Zhong, the two best choices for bang for your buck, IMO would be the GH2 and the 60D, based on what I've read. The GH2 is so popular right now if you purchased it you would be able to sell it in a day or two on the classifieds, if you didn't like it.

The monitor issue is discussed in this forum, which you've read. Strictly for monitor purposes, the 60D would be good.

For a DSLR form factor, they are both excellent cameras, and you've just gotten caught up in the middle of a disucssion or two of the negatives by owners like me that have found downsides, which you will find with any camera.

Thanks Jeff. Yeah, I am debating between the 60d and GH2. I love the 60d build quality, form factor (larger size than GH2), menus, LCD screen, etc.

But I love the GH2 because it provides much better video and no recording limit over the 60d. But then I hear the GH2 is almost impossible to focus (which doesn't make sense to me? why would it be harder to focus than on the 60d?) and the buttons get mispressed sending you to menu hell, etc.

I really don't know which is the better camera to use for weddings...if video quality is better on the GH2, but it is impossible to attain that higher quality, then the GH2 would be useless. I consider out of focus footage pretty useless.

What do you mean the monitoring issue is good for the 60d? From that other monitor thread, it sounds like it would be good for the GH2 as well?

Brian, oh wow, I thought I read somewhere on here that the GH2 and AF100 use the same sensor.

Yeah Jeff...seems that way. I really want to like the GH2 more than the 60D since the GH2 has much better video quality, but things like being unable to focus the GH2 scare me. Is it really harder to focus on the GH2 compared to 60d? Why would that be...because of the 60d's better LCD? But I use an external monitor.

Things like no 720p output on external monitor, same button for shutter/aperature, no 1080p 30fps, messy menus and small size causing mispressed buttons are definitely downfalls of the GH2, inferior build quality, etc. but I can accept those. The one thing I can't accept is an inability to focus.

I heard the GH2 has great autofocus, so wouldn't that help? Or is their superior AF system only available on their slow kit lens?

Zhong,

As an owner of the Canon 7D (which uses an almost identical focus system as the 60D) and the GH2, I guarantee the GH2 will focus faster and more accurately than the 60D. Faster because the contrast based AF of the Canons is very slow compared to the GH2, and when using phase detection AF the Canons must first flip the mirror up to focus video. In my experience the contrast based AF of the GH2 is as fast as the Canon phase detection AF even for stills. Accuracy of focus, for me, has also been better with the GH2.

Your mileage my vary.

If I'm not mistaken the 60d disables AF once you hit record.

If I'm not mistaken the 60d disables AF once you hit record.

Correct. No continuous AF with Canon 7D or 60D in video mode. You can refocus using the shutter button while recording, but the effect is unpredictable.

Who said the GH2 is difficult to focus compared to the Canon DSLRs? It has continuous AF in video mode with the right lenses which the Canon lack. When focusing manually you can use the high resolution EVF in video mode while the Canons must use the LCD screen. Using an external monitor you get full 1080 high resolution output whereas HDMI output of the Canon's is crippled is one way or another e.g. 5DII drops to 480p when recording starts.

The only argument may be that ergonomically it's more difficult with some lenses e.g. focusing manually with 20mm F/1.7 pancake lens.

Nigel,

I just read posts about how unusable a lot of the GH2 footage was because of poor focus (by Jeff Harper), so I was trying to figure out why it was so hard to focus for him and I guess I should reclarify...

I was asking if focusing ease was easier or harder on the GH2 when compared ot the Canon 60D or similar Canon DSLRs. But I suspect Jeff is coming from a real video background, so he would likely have had the same focusing issues with a Canon 60D as the ones he faced using his GH2.

So to confirm: the GH2 has continuous AF that stays on even after the recording button is pressed? Which lens allow the GH2 to use continuous AF in video mode? Only the kit lens?

I also read something about the Follow Focus feature on the GH2 being disable in the firmware to protect the AG-100...is this true?

Follow focus works fine on the GH2. The continuous focus function works with the two standard kit lenses and with the 20mm pancake partially. With ample light the face focus finder works great but once the camera loses the features due to shadows it can go batty.

I find the video auto focus features of GH2 pretty underwhelming. Basically it works ok in very good light, (with small aperture) but even in an average lit room, it hunts all the time. I would never use it for any kind of paying job, wedding or otherwise. You just have to learn manual focus....period. Some kind of external monitor is a must for critical focus. Still haven't figured out how to setup a rig for that, but probably some kind of shoulder rig etc.
My eyesight is very good, and I can just barely get away with using the lcd for many shots where I can practice a focus pull. The EVF is much better...if you're in a position where you can use it...hunched over etc.
That's my $0.02 on focus.

the key thing I've found with AF is that it is annoying in standbye, but once you hit record, it's pretty good, just hit the shutter button halfway and it will refocus quickly in poor light even.

the key thing I've found with AF is that it is annoying in standbye, but once you hit record, it's pretty good, just hit the shutter button halfway and it will refocus quickly in poor light even.
It was funny and humiliating the first time I tried to demo AF to some friends on my GH2. I tried to show AF tracking while the camera was in standby and it didn't work right. Fortunately one of my friends pointed out a few days later that it isn't intuitive that the camera needs to be recording for AF to work properly. It's too bad the poor manual needlessly complicates the learning curve on the GH2.

However, the AF only works with the two kit lenses and partially with the pancake lens? I find the kit lenses to be far too slow, so I wouldn't use them...does that mean I'm effectively throwing away the GH2's AF abilities?

And what do people mean by partially working for the pancake lens?

However, the AF only works with the two kit lenses and partially with the pancake lens? I find the kit lenses to be far too slow, so I wouldn't use them...does that mean I'm effectively throwing away the GH2's AF abilities?

No, not true, I have the Olympus 14-55 f2.8 and AF works well. I'm sure there are plenty of others too.

Here is the definitive list from Panasonic of which lenses do what Compatibilities of DMC-GH2 | Compatibility | Digital Camera | Product Support | Support | Panasonic Global (http://panasonic.jp/support/global/cs/dsc/connect/gh2.html)

Zhong, my unsable footage was the result of walking around with the camera and trying to keep it steady, not focus, but focusing is certainly an issue for many of us being new to the camera.

This discussion is meant to be a thread of issues for those of us that already have the camera, we're not trying to sell the camera or discourage others from buying the camera.

All features don't work with the 20mm, but it is the single most versatile fast lens made for the camera and has the most uses. If there were a single lens I had to choose, it would be the 20mm.

Others around here would prefer the 14-140mm or 14-45, but I personally would never trade my pancake lens for anything.