Jeff Harper
September 25th, 2011, 05:35 AM
Nigel, William, I think you might be right.
I shot a speech at a country club last night, used the GH2 with the 20mm F/1.7 (720 60p) and I shot with the XA10 at 1080 24p. The XA10 wasn't a second camera, I had an hour to sit and just shoot from the back and goof-off during the speech.
From what I can see, the 24p did not seem any different, except it was not as smooth when their was movement. Not a huge bonus, IMO.
I don't know much about 24p, of course, and last night was an informal test in low light. At any rate, William, your comment seems right on the money: it's DOF that gives video a more elegant look, not 24p so much.
On the other hand, 24p may lend itself to better low-light performance because it uses slower shutter speeds, at least from what I've read, but I don't know if that advantage is enough to offset any issues.
On the other hand, advantages in low light would be worth looking at, I might bring up the topic for kicks somewhere, but if you guys want to address that, that would be great also.
I should add here that the XA10 looked about the same as the GH2 last night against a 20mm f/1.7, I was very impressed. GH2 looked better of course, but only VERY slightly, and I didn't tinker with it at all like I should have before hitting record. The GH2 was 5 feet from the speakers, the XA10 was 50 feet, so the GH2 was at a significant advantage. Point: XA10.
I shot a speech at a country club last night, used the GH2 with the 20mm F/1.7 (720 60p) and I shot with the XA10 at 1080 24p. The XA10 wasn't a second camera, I had an hour to sit and just shoot from the back and goof-off during the speech.
From what I can see, the 24p did not seem any different, except it was not as smooth when their was movement. Not a huge bonus, IMO.
I don't know much about 24p, of course, and last night was an informal test in low light. At any rate, William, your comment seems right on the money: it's DOF that gives video a more elegant look, not 24p so much.
On the other hand, 24p may lend itself to better low-light performance because it uses slower shutter speeds, at least from what I've read, but I don't know if that advantage is enough to offset any issues.
On the other hand, advantages in low light would be worth looking at, I might bring up the topic for kicks somewhere, but if you guys want to address that, that would be great also.
I should add here that the XA10 looked about the same as the GH2 last night against a 20mm f/1.7, I was very impressed. GH2 looked better of course, but only VERY slightly, and I didn't tinker with it at all like I should have before hitting record. The GH2 was 5 feet from the speakers, the XA10 was 50 feet, so the GH2 was at a significant advantage. Point: XA10.