Ok, in "m" mode (in exposure mode in the menu) you have control of aperture and shutter.

When in "s" mode you have control of shutter and exposure ( I guess its exposure, the little meter that goes from -3 to +3 or somthing like that)

What happens to exposure setting when in "m" mode?

Thanks
Tim

S is Shutter priority... meaning the camera will leave your shutter speed unchanged and auto-adjust aperture to achieve the desired exposure level you set - say, +1 overexposed, -1 underexposed, etc.

M is full manual, which means the camera will not touch aperture or shutter speed and could frankly care less what your desired exposure level is - it'll just do what you tell it.

Thanks Kevin. I'll try to explain my question better.

The exposure meter that you raise or lower when in "s" mode.....what happens to that when in "m" mode? Why can you no longer control it (whatever "it" is)?

Your asking the wrong question here...

The exposure control in that s setting is the method which the camera judges and bases other settings off of. You set the target exposure, you set the shutter speed, and the camera then changes the ISO and aperture to match the target exposure. Its a target for the camera to shoot for.

When you are in manual... you are releasing all automatic controls so the exposure meter is irrelevant... its full manual and the camera controls nothing.

Ok.. I think I get it now. I'm a little hard headed.

Justin you said something I didn't know. In "s" mode the camera will change the iso too, even though you have it set to say 400 and it says "iso 400" in the LCD?

It will only change the ISO if you set it to "auto ISO." Pegging it down to an ISO prevents it from changing.

When the camera is using AutoISO it will label it as such. It won't show you what ISO it's using.

Ok..... that's good. I can see using "s" mode when mounted on the Merlin.......if it's not constantly changing the aperture.

It will change the aperture, especially if you're outdoors going from sunny to shady areas. However, if you're using a 3rd party lens with a physical aperture ring, it won't change it.

Thanks Kevin. I'll try to explain my question better.

The exposure meter that you raise or lower when in "s" mode.....what happens to that when in "m" mode? Why can you no longer control it (whatever "it" is)?

"It" is an indicator of exposure compensation - that is by how much the exposure has been adjusted over (+) or under (-) the exposure automatically calculated by the camera.

In "s", you set the shutter speed, and the camera calculates the exposure needed, and sets an aperture that will give the right exposure. You can use Exposure compensation to adjust up or down if you think that the camera might have got it wrong (which it does, sometimes). In "a", you set the aperture and the camera adjust shutter to fit. In "p", the camera sets both shutter and aperture.

In "m", you are setting shutter, aperture and ISO yourself, so there's no camera-calculated exposure to compensate for. Hence, you don't see the exposure compensation indicator.

Tim, as has been recommended to me, is to try S mode indoors, and manual outdoors. If you are in a time crunch and under the gun, and are new with the camera, and cannot miss a shot, just put it in P mode and let her fly.

P mode with auto ISO will pretty much never fail. Drawback, especially in a bright outdoor setting the camer will end up using a higher shutter speed than is good, but you will get your shot, period.

I've shot a bunch of weddings using several cameras in P mode, and the footage is quite good, particularly in church. For an outdoor wedding I shot in P mode I got everything, which is more important than anything, and the images overall were acceptable, at the least. But using proper shutter speed, etc they would have come out better where there was movement involved. For wide shots from the rear it almost doesn't matter much.

Now that I'm more comfortable and not quite so freaked out all the time running four of these at a time, (still very stressful) I run S mode indoors and manual outdoors, but STILL run P mode in a pinch. It is easy during a wedding to freak out with them. Stories of videographers missing shots because they are fiddling with settings are rampant, and you look like an idiot at the same time.

Oh, and if you're going to shoot outdoors, have a ND filter handy. You can get by without it, but you really should have one. Again for run and gun, like when they come out of the church if you don't have time to throw it on, forget it, just run in P mode and get the shot.

Don't fall into the trap of trying to achieve perfection with these cameras when starting out. Use the proper/best practice of Shutter or manual mode for indoors, full manual outdoors when you CAN, but when you're under pressure and don't have time to make adjustments, especially at first, just use P mode with auto ISO. You can get through an entire day with it if need be.

Thanks Jeff, very valuable info!

Our next wedding is not until the first of Oct, so I will have a little more time to get to know the GH2. My plan is to hire a second shooter to run the FX and I will be on the GH2, so if i screw up bad I'll have a backup.

Be sure to let us know on that new lens how it does in low light compared to the 20mm.

Hey Tim, I can tell you the diff between F/1.7 isn't much, as we all know, and this lens is so sharp I have absolutely no concerns. Faster is always better, of course, but at 12mm, F/2.0 on the GH2 is still very fast. I've been using a F/2.8 zoom to great effect, and so this lens will be a walk in the park for sure.

I received a Olympus 12-60mm F/2.8 -4.0 today and around the house it is phenomenal, I love it. I shot some quick exterior shots of a church I needed and the lens seems as sharp as the 12mm F/2.0. Olympus really makes great lenses. I'm sold on them.

So do you think you will still find a need for the pancake?

Absolutely, I need both. The12mm will be too wide on some occasions, and the 20mm not wide enough. With my new 12mm-60mm I have a primary lens that covers both ranges and more, which is what I needed most. I already had (have) a Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 (great lens) but it wasn't wide enough for much of the time.

Tim, you can buya gh1 for $400, slap the 20mm on it and put it in the back at leave it alone for a wide shot from the rear of church, or as a unattended b cam for reception. Put it up high on a tripd, focus it on the dance floor and close the lcd screen to save battery power and hit record and let it go for almost 1.5 hours uninterrupted. That's what I do. Worth it's weight in gold. Then get another lens for your GH2 and you'll have three great cams on the cheap, you'll have every important angle covered. Just a thought.

Some good thoughts there Jeff, I gonna try and go into this slowly. I have a feeling within the next year there's gonna be a DSLR/video camera that we all will just have to have.

Question.....do you ever use the AC adapter with the GH's?

I don't. I have an battery pack made for this kind of thing too, and I don't even use that. I just have about 15 batteries. Seems simpler most of the time to carry a battery or two in my pocket than to worry about wires.

Gotcha.

I'm headed home to test the GH against the FX to see how much better the low light is. I'm hoping I can do away with my on cam light at receptions....never did like shinning that light in peoples faces.

I can't live without light, but that is me. When I put the GH2 up 9 feet high with a light on top pointed downward it's not in their faces, and it actually adds to the ambience, and gives you a great light for highlight effects of faces and hair. The light puts sparkle in the eyes. Putting your light up high is the secret, it's kind of what everyone seems to be doing now. You'd love it.

Tim, for the cake cutting, etc, if you choose to use a light, you just will need much less of it than before and it will not be intrusive like it might have been before.

Yea I agree. I always mount one light high on a light pole right beside the FX that's on the tripod....I really like the way that works. But I also would have to put one on my handheld FX too, never liked having to do that. I may just start putting it high on a pole on the other side of the dance floor. For the cake cutting I get my wife to hold the light which is way better than being on the cam.

Ok just ran a little test on the GH & FX.

GH 1.7 aperture - shutter 50 - iso 3200
FX 1.6 - 60 - gain +6.

Not only is the GH not as dark as the FX but the FX looks like it has mud smeared over the lens compared to the GH footage with no grain/noise to be seen. Even a +6 gain the FX has quite a bit of grain/noise. That's why I would never go higher than 6 on gain, I just can't stand the grain/noise.

I am very exicted!!!

Yes, your wife holding a not too bright lite is an excellent method, and you will love your images even more with the GH2. Glad you're happy!

Thanks Jeff. I can already see I am going to need another lens. I've been following my wife around the house with the GH2 and the pancake (until she told me to please stop) and it's just not close enough for those close up prep shots I like to get of the bride (without shoving the thing in her face). The 14-42 is ok to get close, just waaaay to slow. Is there not one lens that will do it all and not break the bank.

Oh boy....here we go.....mo money. haha

Here you go is right....the zoom issue.

I think you want the highly touted Olympus 14-54 2.8-3.5. It's recommended by pretty much everyone that has used it, and Gary Hanna has recommended it (you can take his recommendations to the bank).

As Kevin M points out the faster Olympus F/2.0 zooms are the best, (there are two models) and there is no denying it, but they cost $2500. If you have that much to spend, it's one of those you want.

The Olympus is great, it's what I went with. Actually I went with a slight variation the Olympus 12-60 f/2.8-4.0. The first one I mentioned above is around $500 or so, the 12-60mm can be had for around $700 used, $900 new. I'm extremely happy with the 12-60, it's a great lens, the best quality I could ask for. Beats the Panasonic 14-140 for low light, of course, and as a wedding guy that is what you want, of course.

The only other option for a fast zoom that I know of, that works electronically with the GH2, is the Sigma 18-50 F/2.8, which I have, and it works very well also, but is nearly impossible to find, as it's been out of production for years, I believe. I may or may not be selling mine, if I do it will be posted in the classifieds. It's a great lens, but not wide enough for me. It is also a rare bird, a straight through f/2.8 all the way, and I'm pretty sure there is nothing even close to similar for the GH2.

The downside to all of this is Pansonic is rumoured to be releasing some day a fast zoom also, and I wanted to wait for it, but I couldn't. So there you are.

If anyone else has ideas for Patrick, please chime in. I just don't know of anything else to recommend. I don't think there are alternatives yet.

Tim, if you email me at: jeff at jeffharpervideo dot com I'll reply with some photos I shot with the 12-60 this evening. They show the width of the 12-60, and it's sharpness. In addition, the autofocus is very good as well. I love this lens, as much as the 12mm F/2.0, for outdoor work anyway. It works SO great with the GH2. I love that you can adjust focus manually even when in auto mode, which I've not been able to do with other lenses.

I haven't worked in low light with the lens yet, but I love the zoom range and IQ so far. Some say it is sharper than the 14-54 F/2.8-3.5, but I don't know.

Jeff, I did a search for the Sigma on eBay, and there are a handful available, like this one: Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC MACRO NIKON - RARE VERSION | eBay (http://www.ebay.com/itm/Sigma-18-50mm-f-2-8-EX-DC-MACRO-NIKON-RARE-VERSION-/230653343675?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item35b402b7bb)

It's piqued my curiosity. I think it along with the Panny 14mm f/2.8 would give you a pretty good range. How's the sharpness on the Sigma?

Sigma's good, Patrick. Thing is you would want the Olympus mount, because only the Olympus mount version will work electronically with the GH2. With the Olympus mount you will have electronic aperture control just like with a Panasonic lens, as well as autofocus. You would use the Panasonic made adapter (about $100-$150).

If you go with an electronically controlled Canon, Nikon or any other, then you will not have the ability to change aperture at all, cause the lens has no aperture ring, so you'd be stuck at whatever the previous owner left it at. You would also have no autofocus with a Nikon or other mount.

See, as of now, the only lenses that will function with the GH2 just like they were made for the camera are Olympus mounted lenses and Pansonic brand lenses. If you look at the compatibility chart, you will see the list of Sigmas that will work with the GH2. What they left unsaid on the chart, and confused me initially, was that the Sigma lenses listed are Olympus mounts. That's why my Sigma 30mm F/1.4 and the zoom we're talking about are Olympus mount versions, they are the only ones that work properly.

The reason you and I can work with the FD lenses are because they have an aperture ring. Same with old Nikon lenses with aperture rings, they work fine also. The newer electronically controlled lenses from Canon, Nikon will work (I have one) but you cannot change the aperture when using it on the GH2.

Now that I think about it, I believe there may be an adpater for the Canons that have a built in device to change aperture, but I don't know anything about them.

Birger Engineering is supposedly releasing some day an adapter that will allow Canon EF lenses to function with the GH2, but it is months behind and it is rumoured to cost around $800, and it is technically for the AF100, don't know if anyone's even sure it will work with the GH2 yet, but most think it will, but that's speculation.

All of the above is why Rokinon and Samyang, etc., lines of lenses are popular for the GH2 because they are fully manual lenses with an aperture ring, so no issues, but you're stuck with full manual, just like the Canon FD lenses.

Is all of this clear as mud?

P.S., I have the Sigma 30mm F/1.4 Olympus version for sale in the classifieds, but am thinking of keeping it. It's rather hard to find just like the 18-50 zoom, it's been out of production for ages. The thing is I have about 9 or 10 lenses, and I got to get rid of some of them. But the 30mm is very useful, so I am having second thoughts. I don't use it often, but it's great from the back of a huge cathedral, cause it's not so wide that you lose eveyone as little specks from the balcony.

Email sent Jeff, Thanks

Tim, I sent photos, but message came back to me, I'm thinking it's the IT department policy to not permit the attachments, or that size of attachments (20MB)/

I then sent you a reply to let you know about the first message not getting through...did you get the second message? Do you have a another email address we could use?

I got the second one Jeff. Our server is bad. I do have another email but it's with the same server. I had a photographer try to send a pic yesterday and we never could get it. I think it's the size of the pics.

I hate posting photos on here, as they end up mangled. First photo is zoomed in. Photo to the right is full wide. Same with the river photos.

I was pleased with the color despite not using a polarizer, as the sky came out bluer than I would expect with other lenses I've used.

Those look really good Jeff, thanks.

I have time to wait a few more weeks before I have to make a decision. Maybe that Panny zoom will be available soon.

Wide has been a huge issue with the GH2 for a lot of guys. the 12mm f/2.0 addresses this issue. I didn't even look into the Zuiko zoom until recently, and I'm really glad I got it. I have seen the photos of the new Pannny "X" zooms and they are sloooow.