Reading mode: Light Dark

video quality: E-P1 vs GH1

Go to last post
F

fozzer

Active member
Messages
76
Reaction score
0
Location
US
I've been waiting for the GH1 to come out ever since it was announced, and then in the meantime the E-P1 was released. My husband is shocked and horrified that I would consider spending almost twice as much to get the GH1 and the truth is I'm not really sure it is worth it. Besides lack of autofocus during shooting, are there any other disadvantages of the E-P1?

(My excuses if this has been discussed before. I searched and wasn't able to find a thread about this.)
 
Actually, the E-P1 can do continuous AF during shooting, but it isn't optimized for video. The E-P1 is 720p vs 1080 on the GH1, and it doesn't nearly have as many manual control options for video as the GH1. It also doesn't have an external mic input or an electronic viewfinder. If your goal is to have the best video quality, then the GH1 wins. But like you said, it's also much more expensive, and I don't know if it's worth the cost.

If your focus is still images, then I would go for the E-P1. It has in-body IS. It can AF using all Oly lenses (which are not as bulky as Pany lenses because there's no "Mega OIS"). So you have more lens options with Oly. It's also more compact, less conspicuous, and just plain beautiful. :)
 
I reviewed the online (original files) samples from some of the reviewers and gave them a good, hard look. Clearly my sample size here is very limited, but it is all ya got sometimes.

I found the GH1 video to be siginficantly better. The E-P1 video suffered from "strobing" and had a very over-sharpened look. Now both of these ills are quite possibly fixable by alterations in settings; for example, the strobing look can be aggravated a lot by too-high shutter speeds, but on the basis of the samples available to me, I'd say the video quality of the GH1 was visibly better.

Naturally, YMMV.
 
Sharpening on Videos seems to use the stills setting - I've got mine set in natural mode with the sharp on Minus-2 and the Vids seem to follow,. they're very Un-haloed so far more professional looking than regular Digicams and budget camcorders.

--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist

 
Thanks for these observations. I wasn't aware that the Oly did continuous autofocus, my bad. I also wasn't aware about the IS issue for stills. Having the IS in the body of the camera is indeed important when shooting with Leica and Nikon lenses like I plan on doing. But having Full HD video and manual video controls is super important to me. I really love the look and size and price of the Oly, but prefer the functionality of the GH1 (the EVF and flip-out screen are 2 features I also love). Aaarrgghh! So hard to decide.
 
I have also tossed this around and have decided on the GH1. I am very much into video. I plan to use my 7 Zuiko manual lenes with the kit lens on my GH1. (If I ever comes)
--
Roger Bloemers
 
That's interesting because I saw similar comments about the video from the Canon 500D here http://www.juzaphoto.com/eng/articles/canon_eos_500d_tests_review.htm

Is it possible that settings for in camera JPEGs are generally not suitable for video?

I've noticed that when post-processing normal images that you get very different results with the same USM or other sharpening setting depending on the image dimensions. So for instance if you downsize an image file for posting on the internet and try applying the same sharpening settings that you would normally apply to the full resolution image it can look horribly over-sharpened. As the video basically uses downsized JPEGs is the same thing going on here? It would seem a bit of an oversight on the part of the manufacturers - however it would appear that they have not properly scaled their normal camera JPEG settings to the lower resolution images being used in video. In other words the standard in camera JPEG settings have a proportionally much greater effect (and an undesirable one) on the lower resolution images the video uses.
 
I was planning the purchase the GH1 until the price was revealed. Purchased a Sony HX1 (a superzoom cam, around $500 US) until the GH1 prices came down, but I ended up selling it for two reasons. One - the IQ was disappointing. Two - Even though the body was relatively small, it was still too bulky to be my "take everywhere" camera. That said, the 1080p video with stereo audio was really great.

Then the EP1 was revealed and I instantly fell in love with the look and concept of it. I needed good HD video and great IQ. A week plus in and I'm happy with the quality of both. To avoid the loud AF noise, I just focus before hitting record and stay with the subject in the focal range. It's worked fine for my needs. The only noise I need to eliminate is the metal clang of the strap loops. Have to find some sort of discrete black bands or something.

I primarily view my HD videos on a 46" HDTV and they look very nice depending on the light when I shot the video. I've seen users post night time vids on this forum that looked very good, but haven't taken any myself yet.

Whenever the GH1 gets closer to the $1000 mark, I'll probably get it in addition to the EP1 since I really would love to get the mic attachment.

Don't know if that helped, but yes I was wrestling with the choice for a while before I jumped to the Ep1 too.
 
I sold a Canon 400d and a Canon HG10 to get the E-P1. I would prefer the GH1 for its video performance and external mic input but I can't justify the extra £400 or so.

I love the E-P1 but you have to work with its limitations for video.
 
I guess it depends on your needs, this is how I see it.

GH1, less compromises, you get 60fps 720p, which many are regarding quite highly, less rolling shutter, external mic input, and full manual control.

E-P1, you get focus motor noises while recording, lots of rolling shutter (ala D90), only 30fps, only P mode (afaik), No "real" IS during shooting, oh, and only motion jpg option, so that eats up memory cards like no tomorrow.

So for quickie clips, the EP1 is probably fine, but for something that could really replace a camcorder, I think the G1 with the kit lens is a better option.
--
Cloverdale, B.C., Canada
Olympus e-510 L1
http://www.joesiv.com
 
The GH1's EVF and articulating LCD panel present a huge advantage over the E-P1's fixed LCD "viewfinder".

The GH1 has a port for an external mic. The E-P1 records the noise AF either from single AF or continuous AF mode focusing. The E-P1 picks up wind noise from breezes, I can't imagine how bad it would be in a real wind.

The E-P1's video feature is not a reason to buy the camera. Period.

--
BJ Nicholls
SLC, UT
 
To be fair the onboard mics of the GH1 pic up wind and focus noises (although not from the 14-140 which is super quiet). Even with a mic mounted on top you're not going to get the best audio, which is why a lot of the pro-ams use field audio recorders and sync sound in post production.
 
fozzer said:
...My husband is shocked and horrified that I would consider spending almost twice as much to get the GH1 and the truth is I'm not really sure it is worth it....
Click to expand...
The "body" portion of the price is comparable bit this is moot since it is only sold as a kit. Body-wise, the GH1 gives you more features including fundamentally better video But what you are really paying for with the GH1 kit s the 14-140 video-optimized lens: large zoom ratio, very good if not "great" IQ, silent motor, continuous silent focus and aperture control, in-lens video-friendly OIS.

I think the E-P1 is a compelling option depending on your style of still photography, but for more than occasional video capture there is a pretty large gap between the two. That said, you certainly have to believe in the difference yourself before you will be able to defend it to someone else. But (a little unsolicited relationship advice here) when it comes to husbands and wives, it's better not to have to defend in the first place. I try hard not to argue with my wife if she wants a particular product, even if I think I understand the issues and have a different conclusion. There is just no upside to the cycle of "I can't believe you'd buy that" followed by "I told you it was a waste of money" if the product subsequently isn't perfect . Or, the opposite and equally troublesome scenario of "I went against my preferences to placate you, and now look what I'm stuck with".

Over the long haul, you will invest in lenses, adapters and flashes that interchange between Panasonic and Olympus bodies (with a few asterisks), and you will eventually upgrade the body anyway, so it's not a permanent decision.

--
JoelH
 
I can't imagine anyone would want AF during video. Basically that's user error.
siminona said:
Actually, the E-P1 can do continuous AF during shooting, but it isn't optimized for video. The E-P1 is 720p vs 1080 on the GH1, and it doesn't nearly have as many manual control options for video as the GH1. It also doesn't have an external mic input or an electronic viewfinder. If your goal is to have the best video quality, then the GH1 wins. But like you said, it's also much more expensive, and I don't know if it's worth the cost.
Click to expand...
 
Film is normally shot with a "180 degree" shutter, which in the revolving shutter world means that the exposure is 1/2 the frame rate. That is one of the two things (the other being contrast) that gives film its characteristic look and of the two is the one most people don't understand until they are told about it. Most video, on the other hand, is continuously exposed (so to speak) and has a distinctive fluid look. Modern film cine cameras and CCD/CMOS video can be adjusted to shorter frame exposures and that gives the sharp look without motion blur, for example in Saving Private Ryan.

If you want the film look in bright light, you need to close the iris and/or use a neutral density filter.

If you want to retain that look
P. Kierstead said:
I reviewed the online (original files) samples from some of the reviewers and gave them a good, hard look. Clearly my sample size here is very limited, but it is all ya got sometimes.

I found the GH1 video to be siginficantly better. The E-P1 video suffered from "strobing" and had a very over-sharpened look. Now both of these ills are quite possibly fixable by alterations in settings; for example, the strobing look can be aggravated a lot by too-high shutter speeds, but on the basis of the samples available to me, I'd say the video quality of the GH1 was visibly better.
Click to expand...
 
These bands are called gaffer tape.
BayAreaWZ said:
The only noise I need to eliminate is the metal clang of the strap loops. Have to find some sort of discrete black bands or something.
Click to expand...
 
And without timecode although it would be possible to sync the audio by stretching/shrinking it if you have a half decent NLE, wow, what a pain.
Oelph said:
To be fair the onboard mics of the GH1 pic up wind and focus noises (although not from the 14-140 which is super quiet). Even with a mic mounted on top you're not going to get the best audio, which is why a lot of the pro-ams use field audio recorders and sync sound in post production.
Click to expand...
 
joebloe said:
Film is normally shot with a "180 degree" shutter, which in the revolving shutter world means that the exposure is 1/2 the frame rate. That is one of the two things (the other being contrast) that gives film its characteristic look and of the two is the one most people don't understand until they are told about it. Most video, on the other hand, is continuously exposed (so to speak) and has a distinctive fluid look. Modern film cine cameras and CCD/CMOS video can be adjusted to shorter frame exposures and that gives the sharp look without motion blur, for example in Saving Private Ryan.

If you want the film look in bright light, you need to close the iris and/or use a neutral density filter.

If you want to retain that look
Click to expand...
Are you saying that one of these cameras can achieve the film look via faster shutter speed? It seems your message was cut off at the end...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top