GH2 footage doesn't look as good as my old camera, why?

[Jim Snow]

Birger has a new adapter for the GH2 and AF100 that will allow the Canon 'L' lenses to be used with the full functionality of the lenses. It's expensive though but it might be worth it for those who already own Canon lenses.

http://www.birger.com

[Lisa Maxwell]

Originally Posted by Jim Snow

Birger has a new adapter for the GH2 and AF100 that will allow the Canon 'L' lenses to be used with the full functionality of the lenses. It's expensive though but it might be worth it for those who already own Canon lenses.

Birger Engineering, Inc.

$700 is a little steep for my budget to add on to the already spendy Canon L series. I have no lenses to start with. I'm starting to rethink the GH2 if I can't find a fast lens that works in dark churches from a distance.

[Kin Lau]

An old manual focus 50/1.4 in ETC mode is about a 260mm equiv. Do you need something longer? There's a few fast cine/tv zooms that should fit the bill.

[Martyn Hull]

Without doubt after a couple months of use i find my GH2 can beet the 550D all round, its a lot sharper even in 720P than the 550D or yes T2i in the usa,the 550Ds 720P was poor but i miss 25P as my editing set up realy struggles with 24P and it puts a slight jitter on 24P after its rendered, color i like the GH2 color but i did the 550s as well.So far so good.

[Dan Carter]

Originally Posted by Lisa Maxwell

$700 is a little steep for my budget to add on to the already spendy Canon L series. I have no lenses to start with. I'm starting to rethink the GH2 if I can't find a fast lens that works in dark churches from a distance.

Have you considered the Lumix 20mm f1.7?

[Lisa Maxwell]

None of these seem to have image stabilization, and I need the shallow depth of field, and yes a longer lens because I can't be right up in the wedding party's faces.

[Jeff Harper]

Dan, the 20mm 1.7 is a wide angle lens, does not work from a distance. And it is not bright enough sometimes, at least for wedding stuff.

Great zooms at a reasonable price are EXTREMELY challenging to find for under 2K. You can get a prime such as a Canon 85mm f/1.8 or Rokinon f/1.4 85mm for under $500, but depending on the church it will be too long, or not long enough. A fast zoom lens f/2.8 continous costs about $2500 new. Any slower and I don't see how I can use it.

Lisa, let me say you are wise to proceed with caution. All my extra money is going into lenses, and I will have less flexibility than before, and it will be more difficult to do my job, and often the results will not be any better than with a regular camera.

You can find decent fast lenses, but they are primes, which even many photographers often don't like to use!

Photographers often carry at least two cameras, they carry one around their neck, and the other on in their hands, and I even know one guy who keeps two around his neck. I have a whole new respect for those who have been using DSLRs for weddings.

[Dan Carter]

Originally Posted by Jeff Harper

Dan, the 20mm 1.7 is a wide angle lens, does not work from a distance. And it is not bright enough sometimes, at least for wedding stuff.

Great zooms at a reasonable price are EXTREMELY challenging to find for under 2K. You can get a prime such as a Canon 85mm f/1.8 or Rokinon f/1.4 85mm for under $500, but depending on the church it will be too long, or not long enough. A fast zoom lens f/2.8 continous costs about $2500 new. Any slower and I don't see how I can use it.

Lisa, let me say you are wise to proceed with caution. All my extra money is going into lenses, and I will have less flexibility than before, and it will be more difficult to do my job, and often the results will not be any better than with a regular camera.

You can find decent fast lenses, but they are primes, which even many photographers often don't like to use!

Photographers often carry at least two cameras, they carry one around their neck, and the other on in their hands, and I even know one guy who keeps two around his neck. I have a whole new respect for those who have been using DSLRs for weddings.

The Lumix 20mm f1.7 which I've been using, equals 40mm on the GH2, which to me is not wide angle. It also functions very well at a distance. In EX mode it can exceed 100mm. In low-light, I find this lens better than any of my fast Canon lenses.

[Jeff Harper]

Dan, Lisa specifically said "longer lens". 50mm is considered portrait. 85mm, etc. is more of what is considered to be a long lens. For dark churches 1.7 is stretching it, at least where I live. Are you saying your 20mm f/1.7 is superior to a Canon f/1.4? You didn't specify which lens the Panasonic is superior to, I'd be interested, as I'm looking at lenses myself.

[Dan Carter]

Jeff,

Like Lisa, I think many of us are looking for a fast, long, stabilized, low-light lens for under $700. Unfortunately, though this lens exists in some video cameras, it doesn't yet exist for DSLRs. If only we could match the larger DSLR sensor with our favorite camcorder lens. So, as your initial post explains, we're attracted to the DSLR sensor and the search for our ideal lens combination begins.

I use a Tamron f2.8 17-50mm and Canon f1.8 28mm with an EOS 7D. Though the lenses perform nicely, 7D low-light images, in my opinion, are not useable above 800 ISO, and in rare cases maybe 1250. I was rather disappointed to discover this. On the other hand, I was happy to discover the GH2, again in my opinion, produces good images at 1600 ISO and often as high as 3200. I can shoot the Lumix f4, 14-140 at 3200 ISO with better results than the 7D with f2.8 17-50 at 800 ISO. The Canon f1.8 on the 7D is only marginally better, and nowhere close to the Lumix f1.7 20mm.

I haven't used the Canon lenses on the GH2, because I don't want to lose the lighter weight, auto AF+AE and in-camera image processing provided by the Panasonic lenses.

I also use the Lumix f4, 7-14 with great results. Canon is still not able to supply their equivalent to this lens.

[Jeff Harper]

Ok Dan, so the camera is more the culprit than the lens, you're saying. There are fast lenses available, but which brand, which adapter, and which size seems to be the questions that complicate it. And do we lose any light as a result? Some adapter it seems yes, some no, but I have no clue.

I'm now looking at Canon FD lenses because they are inexpensive and apparently work well with an adapter that Nigel B. recommends. There's the 50mm f/1.2 for around $400, the 50mm f/1.4 for around $130, and 85mm 1.8 for a couple or three hundred, maybe a bit more, I forget. Prices are for FD mounts, not the newer lenses. Do I want to invest in those old lenses? Not really.

I'm thinking I'm going to have to use at least one conventional video camera for wedding work, at least for ceremonies, or use 3-4 of these hybrids so can can cover all the focal lengths I need. Two to three in the back, etc one long, one medium.

[Jim Forrest]

Originally Posted by Dan Carter

The Lumix 20mm f1.7 which I've been using, equals 40mm on the GH2, which to me is not wide angle. It also functions very well at a distance. In EX mode it can exceed 100mm. In low-light, I find this lens better than any of my fast Canon lenses.

Your Lumix 20mm f1.7 is a micro 4/3 lens? Or 4/3 lens?
Just curious...I have the micro 4/3 lens and the 20mm is 20mm on my GH2.

[Dan Carter]

Originally Posted by Jim Forrest

Your Lumix 20mm f1.7 is a micro 4/3 lens? Or 4/3 lens?
Just curious...I have the micro 4/3 lens and the 20mm is 20mm on my GH2.

Jim,

I use the H-H020 Lumix G 20mm / f1.7. This is a Micro Four Thirds mount lens for G Series cameras. Considering the GH2 crop factor of 2.0 puts this lens at 40mm.

Here's the spec from the Panasonic site: "f=20mm (35mm camera equivalent 40mm) ".

[Jim Forrest]

Got ya. You were using the 35mm equation . That's true of all the lenses we have been talking about (unless you are using a full frame camera).... I was sorta talking about lenses in general in addressing Jeff's quest for a fast a fast 50 mm or 80mm lens for his weddings. In this case any lens, he would still have to go through the 35mm equation on any llens he could buy....like the rest of us.
I was just thinking of the mm's before we got to that point.
I still think the 20mm 1.7 could be useful. So with the 35mm equation and the ETC , that lens would then be somewhere around 96mm? And still be 1.7 lens?

(sorry for the spelling...I am just so pissed about this administrations lack of action in Lybia).

[Dan Carter]

Originally Posted by Jim Forrest

Got ya. You were using the 35mm equation . That's true of all the lenses we have been talking about (unless you are using a full frame camera).... I was sorta talking about lenses in general in addressing Jeff's quest for a fast a fast 50 mm or 80mm lens for his weddings. In this case any lens, he would still have to go through the 35mm equation on any llens he could buy....like the rest of us.
I was just thinking of the mm's before we got to that point.
I still think the 20mm 1.7 could be useful. So with the 35mm equation and the ETC , that lens would then be somewhere around 96mm? And still be 1.7 lens?

(sorry for the spelling...I am just so pissed about this administrations lack of action in Lybia).

Thanks for backing me up on that Jim. That's the point I was trying to make when I mentioned "In EX (ETC)mode it can exceed 100mm.". And, as you mention, no loss of f-stop. Personally, I think this is a huge benefit. Assign a function button to EX mode, and you can switch lenses with the touch of a button.