M. Reichmann of LL says GH2 is good enough for him!

No one can forcast what exactly will happen the next few years. I agree with Michael that the writing is on the wall.

In your comparison you specifically start talking about very expensive systems that weigh a lot and are not mainstream and never have been so. Mainstream to me is a system that is sold the most. Currently that is an APS-c DSLR system. I can see that change withtin 5 years in some mirrorless form of m43 and or APS-c and or some other, to be developed largish sensor. The mainstream in my opinion will be mirrorless and (therefor) will have and EVF. The biggest hurdle in my view is not the high ISO performance, not the AF speed nor the IQ in total. It is really good and good enough for the mainstream. What is holding it back other than sentiments is the problem with action shooting. If EVFs can (they will) overcome that one (processorspeed will be important of course), a lot of people will get rid of APS-c DSLRs and their large lenses. I am convinced of that.

Actually, the push focus on GH2 is very very cool and it can be combined both in push focus and auto focus with mf, right there in front of you with a scale to tell you which way to go in the evf. To do this in push focus or af just hold focus and turn the focus ring, the push focus is the most robust in this approach as once you have af point, turn the focus ring and once you release it stays there! its very very good.

Jogger said:

AF for video should be left for small sensor camcorders... even then its easy to mess up, just look at many news videos when the focus is in the background, but they didnt realise it till after.

Also, notice that all the video lenses announced are manual focus, its that way for a reason.

Just Having Fun said:

SamKnopf said:

I noticed that he said that the GH2 is great because it has the best autofocus for video .

Then he said he likes to use it with a fast lens to blur the background: "Let it be enough to say that with a fast lens (for shallow DOF) it is to my mind the best video capable DSLR type camera on the market."

However, there is not much in the way of options for that. The only fast lens that has autofocus is the 20mm, which is not really suitable for video. There is no constant f/2.8 zoom available yet. If you want a choice of fast lenses to blur the background, a Canon or Nikon should be on your shopping list.

Click to expand...

So you recommend a Canon which does not AF with any lens during video?
You really aren't making sense.

The 14-54mmII is very fast to focus during video. There is also the native f/2.8 macro and other lenses.

Also, the 20mm lens is one of the BEST lenses for video on the GH2. Why? because of Ext Tele mode which allows you have a fast lens and multiple focal lengths. You can switch from 40mm EFL to over 100mm EFL and get great low light razor sharp video.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Bjorn,

Very nice work. I've bookmarked your post.

Dan.

viztyger said:

I'm not going to judge Mr, Reichman's photography, but for me the GH2 provides a file quality that is good enough as well.

Then there are its other strengths: I'm travelling through India now and I couldn't have gotten some of my photos with a conventional DSLR. For one thing, you can't see a thing in the bright Rajasthan desert sun on the (a) rear screen. So the EVF becomes critical for judging focus, composition and exposure. Sometimes you have the opportunity to take a shot again.

And when you can see the screen, its articulated design greatly increases potential shooting angles. Also I like to travel light, and the MFT allows me to pack a whopping 14 to 600mm range without lugging round such heavy gear.

Those interested bcan check out my blog; I'm posting photos from India on a regular basis.
http://www.bmupix.com

SamKnopf said:

I noticed that he said that the GH2 is great because it has the best autofocus for video.

Then he said he likes to use it with a fast lens to blur the background: "Let it be enough to say that with a fast lens (for shallow DOF) it is to my mind the best video capable DSLR type camera on the market."

However, there is not much in the way of options for that. The only fast lens that has autofocus is the 20mm, which is not really suitable for video. There is no constant f/2.8 zoom available yet. If you want a choice of fast lenses to blur the background, a Canon or Nikon should be on your shopping list.

Click to expand...

Panasonic has said it is working on a bright zoom.

viztyger said:

I'm quite sure that the GH2 is a fine camera, but I'm pretty happy with the GH1, and I am skeptical about his claims that the GH2 is so very much better.

I have found in the past that his judgment on technical aspects of cameras is not very reliable. For example, he raved about the Canon G7:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/Canon-G7.shtml

That was a camera with serious shadow noise and blurring of detail at its lowest ISO. I bought one based on his review, but fortunately it was from a store that gave refunds.

ogremage said:

Michael Reichmann of Luminious Landscape (who I hope needs no introduction) revisits the GH2 and finds it "good enough" for his needs.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/panasonic_gh2_revisited.shtml

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
Björn

http://www.bmupix.com

Click to expand...

Jim Radcliffe said:

Oh.. and for those who think the EVF will never be better than an OVF.. I remember the same arguments about digital not replacing film... we all know how that turned out.

--
Jim Radcliffe
http://www.boxedlight.com

Click to expand...

I agree, just sold my F6

I was one of those who said digital would never replace velvia and top quality nikon scanner (or big heavy cameras). Tempted to sell my 4000ED scanner now

Having got the EP-1 then the GH2 I changed my mind

Jim Radcliffe said:

I agree with MR. I have been waiting for my GH2 for two months now and have been making do with the GF1. The main reason I wanted the GH2 is for the EVF and AF improvements. While I am no fan of the Mini-DSLR look of the GH2 I feel it is compelling enough on a number of levels to want one.

Click to expand...

And I really do find the ergonomics of my G1 preferable to my GF1 even though aesthetically I prefer the GF1. I want the GH2 for the same reasons as you with the bit of increase in higher ISO and hopefully just a bit of DR but haven't ordered it yet.

Member said:

Yes, I have a Canon 5DII... which sits unused with its nice L glass. MFT allows me to do more than my bulky Canon system. I've recently thought of selling all my Canon gear but have not quite cut the tether yet.

Click to expand...

I've thought the same, though I had decided not to upgrade to the 5DII--decided I could rent the body if really needed. I did sell off a number of lenses last Spring after a year plus with m4/3.

Member said:

Member said:

Can't wait to get my hands on the GH2 and I know that even better things are coming for MFT. It's a good time to be a photographer.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Agree.

Member said:

Jim Radcliffe
http://www.boxedlight.com

The ability to 'see' the shot is more important than the gear used to capture it.

Click to expand...

--
Diane B
http://www.pbase.com/picnic
G1 gallery http://www.pbase.com/picnic/temp_g1

If you want something that can take good quality photos and amazing video, its hard to beat the GH2 (or even the Gh1 for that matter)

I know of no other camera that integrates the video ability as well. The video doesn't feel like an add on, but an integral part of the cameras form and function.

At the same time, its a pretty good overall still photo tool as well, with a good selection of lens to do everything from wide angle to long tele shots.

If you wanted just a single camera and wanted to do both, Gh2 can't be beat.

However, if you don't care about the video aspect, I really don't think its an amazing still camera. Mind you, its not bad, and certainly on par with many other cameras out there, but the overall IQ isn't exactly amazing either.

I'd much prefer his Leica M9 for still shooting, but of course that camera doesn't have video so you'd need an additional video camera and thats perhaps not really fun to carry both.

So the Gh series becomes a compromise, it gives you everything you want and while not amazing at everything, at least it does it, and does it pretty well.

I think thats exactly what the design purpose of the camera was as well. No one said its supposed to be the best still camera around. No one said its going to replace a 5D mkII for landscapes or a Leica for street shooting, or a Nikon D3 on the sidelines at a NFL game.

Its not a specialist camera but a general purpose camera that can do a bit of everything and do most of it well above average.
--
http://www.millsartphotography.com

The replacement of the classic DSLR is dependent with micro 4/3 technology depends on the ability to improve upon the EVF system. I also believe that mirror based systems will not be the primary camera format in the next few or perhaps 5 or 6 years
--
http://markkayphotography.smugmug.com/gallery/1305161

No. The EVF of the GH2 beats the optical view finders of almost every entry to mid-level DSLR: it is much larger and much brighter. Only the Pentax K5 finder comes close. Currently, I think that only the OVFs of FF cameras are still superior the GH2's EVF.

mark kay said:

The replacement of the classic DSLR is dependent with micro 4/3 technology depends on the ability to improve upon the EVF system. I also believe that mirror based systems will not be the primary camera format in the next few or perhaps 5 or 6 years
--
http://markkayphotography.smugmug.com/gallery/1305161

Click to expand...

--
Thomas

At least my G1 is not capable of doing any action shooting when you want to single out a fast moving object. Way too slow. They need to solve this.

tgutgu said:

No. The EVF of the GH2 beats the optical view finders of almost every entry to mid-level DSLR: it is much larger and much brighter. Only the Pentax K5 finder comes close. Currently, I think that only the OVFs of FF cameras are still superior the GH2's EVF.

Click to expand...

Makers got lazy I've big penta mirror film body VF's that are quite good really.

I'm not shocked at the LL article and MR is known to love EVF's but I strongly disagree with his opinion on this.

I can't stand EVF's even v not bad ish but not great entry level DSLR viewfinders (some are better some worse)

Choice is a good thing I see with my eyes and want to see as my eyes do through a lens.

BTW because one photographer likes the mirror less models does not make it so for all, according to him we shouldn't be able to buy film right now. I for one celebrate choice what a dull world it would be with only one type of VF or no VF at all.

Dan Clark said:

Bjorn,

Very nice work. I've bookmarked your post.

Dan.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the kind words Dan, and everyone in the else in the posts above.

India is very inspiring and the GH2 is serving me very well. I'll try to keep up the posts, although power and internet haven't always been reliable.

--
Björn

http://www.bmupix.com

There are three striking things for me on the LL site:

• first, how often the editor gets offered equipment to test for free, gets invited to Leica to take a look at how they build the M9, etc
• second, how often the editor appears to be traveling around the world in nice places
• third and final, how wherever he goes (even the most beautiful spots), and however sophisticated the equipment he uses (Leica "S", mid-fomat, etc), he only ever shows very, very boooring shots that most people w a bit of an eye, and an iPhone, can easily beat. Look at the San Miguel de Allende shots, or he Antarctica shots - pathetic

Worse, he seems to be connected to people who sometimes offer "teach ins" where it seems that they, too, have a huge difficulty in coming up with an interesting shot, needing maybe 20 photos before they get to something remotely decent, when many REAL photographers would have needed just 5 at most.

I have thus come to the conclusion that he may have enough money to spend, and be well-connected, and be very knowledgeable technically - but he just is not an artist, period, and unfortunately these things cannot be learned much

So then, what are his needs? Well if he gives up on art because he just cannot do it, this leaves the "recording the moment" dimension. An clearly a GH2 offers quite sufficient IQ for this purpose (an iPhone almost also does), and ditto for video (which an iPhone also does reasonably well).

So yeah, why not. Once one is ready to lug around some heavier equipment, the GH2 at least can do both film and stills, unlike my Nkon D7k which can do stills but cannot do video - at least not if you assume that subjects would be in focus.

It's the documenter who is obsessed with IQ, not the artist.
--
Everybody loves gadgets, until they try to make them
http://www.flickr.com/photos/thinkfat
http://thinkfat.blogspot.com

Tastes may differ, but I for one agree with you. Despite all the IQ talk, coming up with good shots is not the strongest point of LL... unfortunately. Rgds, P.

antoineb said:

There are three striking things for me on the LL site:

• first, how often the editor gets offered equipment to test for free, gets invited to Leica to take a look at how they build the M9, etc
• second, how often the editor appears to be traveling around the world in nice places
• third and final, how wherever he goes (even the most beautiful spots), and however sophisticated the equipment he uses (Leica "S", mid-fomat, etc), he only ever shows very, very boooring shots that most people w a bit of an eye, and an iPhone, can easily beat. Look at the San Miguel de Allende shots, or he Antarctica shots - pathetic

Worse, he seems to be connected to people who sometimes offer "teach ins" where it seems that they, too, have a huge difficulty in coming up with an interesting shot, needing maybe 20 photos before they get to something remotely decent, when many REAL photographers would have needed just 5 at most.

I have thus come to the conclusion that he may have enough money to spend, and be well-connected, and be very knowledgeable technically - but he just is not an artist, period, and unfortunately these things cannot be learned much

So then, what are his needs? Well if he gives up on art because he just cannot do it, this leaves the "recording the moment" dimension. An clearly a GH2 offers quite sufficient IQ for this purpose (an iPhone almost also does), and ditto for video (which an iPhone also does reasonably well).

So yeah, why not. Once one is ready to lug around some heavier equipment, the GH2 at least can do both film and stills, unlike my Nkon D7k which can do stills but cannot do video - at least not if you assume that subjects would be in focus.

Click to expand...

Probably a bit harsh he has taken some very nice shots before but like many I don't care for his non landscape work much myself down to taste.

Unfortunately he does come across as a bit of a brochure at times esp for Panasonic and we can all guess he's connected fairly heavily with them.

I'm sure the GH2 is very nice and will suit the needs of some shooters who want decent stills and good video but he has to understand his needs are not the same as everyone.

What are the innuendos all about regarding Michael Reichmann?

He is heavily involved with Panasonic???

He is rich??

What difference does it make to any of us?

He is a good communicator and writer, which makes his views on the cameras he uses very enjoyable to read. At least to me.

I am not aware that he makes any claims to being a great Photographer nor do the reviewers on this site with their Sample Galleries. Do they?

I detect some sort of twisted jealousy at work. He has worked hard all his life being a publisher among other things and has the right to enjoy the fruits of his labours.

katy C. said:

What are the innuendos all about regarding Michael Reichmann?

He is heavily involved with Panasonic???

He is rich??

What difference does it make to any of us?

He is a good communicator and writer, which makes his views on the cameras he uses very enjoyable to read. At least to me.

I am not aware that he makes any claims to being a great Photographer nor do the reviewers on this site with their Sample Galleries. Do they?

I detect some sort of twisted jealousy at work. He has worked hard all his life being a publisher among other things and has the right to enjoy the fruits of his labours.

Click to expand...

I concur with this. Basically, this is the attempt of character assassination. Mr. Reichmann's point of view does not matter because he is a bad photographer. I think he is a very good photographer, maybe not top notch, but definitely qualified to judge a camera. The next accusation is, he is bought by panasonic. Therefore, his opinion is not objective.

I think Mr. Reichmann's opinion is remarkable and it matters. Therefore, he is being attacked so viciously.

Don't you think it's sick?

MR talks about the GH2. In this camera at 3 fps the blackout (no refresh of VF during the burst) has been eliminated. It isn't yet their where DSLRs are but it's close. This is one of the very few disadvantages of the EVF. However, for its main purpose, "finding" and composition, a GH2 finder is much better than most DSLR finders. (The Olympus VF-2 is better as well).

Jorginho said:

At least my G1 is not capable of doing any action shooting when you want to single out a fast moving object. Way too slow. They need to solve this.

Click to expand...

--
Thomas

katy C. said:

Don't you think it's sick?

Click to expand...

Yes, this tells you more about the posters than about M. Reichmann. Sometimes I get upset about it, but if it is blatant obvious, well then it doesn't really matter ;-) People can tell and read between the lines.