• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

GH2 review (1 Viewer)

njlarsen said:
The locust in this image also illustrate the point of less depth of field compared to superzooms. I have other photos where the eye is less in focus and the side above the second leg is better focused.

And then to think that some photographers complain of the DOF being too large in cameras with this sensor compared to Nikon/Canon cameras 8-P

Niels
Click to expand...

Hi Niels
Been reading through your experiences and results with the GH2. It's looking good! However, this point of having a small DOF is one that I think would trip me up. I presume you've tried reducing the aperture to increase the DOF and not been able to get the shutter speeds etc needed? Do you feel like you're gradually getting closer to the results you'd like?
Thanks
Hobbes
 
Thanks Hobbes,
initially when starting out, I tried using Aperture priority and did not feel I could get a fast enough shutter speed to get sharp images. I still need to experiment more on this.

However, regarding DOF, I do not regard that as a huge problem any more -- it is only a question of getting the focus on the face of the bird and even better on the eye, then a little subpar sharpness elsewhere is not that big of a deal. For example, I am pretty happy with this grassquit: http://www.birdforum.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/365253/ppuser/7427

The head is sharp (to my eyes) but the tail is not -- and that is not a problem.

I will be traveling a fair bit in August, and probably bring home several hundred shots from that trip, that will be where the real test happens, but I am a happy camper at the moment (in fact so happy that my wife will be getting a camera too, so that I can use this one without competition -- although she is using the 14-140 lens for her photo interest)

Niels
 
Hi Neils
Thanks for your helpful reply and I'm glad to hear your wife is enjoying the camera too. The grassquit photo has a very appealing quality to it - lovely lighting, sharp detail and good focus. I'd definitely be pleased with that shot |=)|. I shall certainly be doing more research on the m4/3 systems - I'm a bit worried about the lack of stabilisation on the GH2 but your photos don't seem to be any the worse for it.
Good luck with the photos in August.
Hobbes


njlarsen said:
Thanks Hobbes,
initially when starting out, I tried using Aperture priority and did not feel I could get a fast enough shutter speed to get sharp images. I still need to experiment more on this.

However, regarding DOF, I do not regard that as a huge problem any more -- it is only a question of getting the focus on the face of the bird and even better on the eye, then a little subpar sharpness elsewhere is not that big of a deal. For example, I am pretty happy with this grassquit: http://www.birdforum.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/365253/ppuser/7427

The head is sharp (to my eyes) but the tail is not -- and that is not a problem.

I will be traveling a fair bit in August, and probably bring home several hundred shots from that trip, that will be where the real test happens, but I am a happy camper at the moment (in fact so happy that my wife will be getting a camera too, so that I can use this one without competition -- although she is using the 14-140 lens for her photo interest)

Niels
Click to expand...
 
Thanks Hobbes,

Hobbes2 said:
I shall certainly be doing more research on the m4/3 systems - I'm a bit worried about the lack of stabilisation on the GH2 but your photos don't seem to be any the worse for it.

Hobbes
Click to expand...

The GH2 does not have in camera stabilization, but any longer Pana lenses have that (the stabilization of the 100-300 is probably less effective than on most of their other lenses). Olympus cameras have the IS built in, but then their lenses have not. The lack of a built in EVF in the Olympus cameras combined with their slower focusing made them non-starters form me.

Niels
 
njlarsen said:
Thanks Hobbes,

The GH2 does not have in camera stabilization, but any longer Pana lenses have that (the stabilization of the 100-300 is probably less effective than on most of their other lenses). Olympus cameras have the IS built in, but then their lenses have not. The lack of a built in EVF in the Olympus cameras combined with their slower focusing made them non-starters form me.

Niels
Click to expand...

Hi Niels
Thank you for your reply. It's a real shame that Panasonic don't have the range of lenses that Olympus have. I'm seriously tempted by the GH2 + 100-300mm lens. But, I've become quite used to having 800mm reach and although the crop factor with the GH2 would be better than my FZ8, I'm not sure I'd get the shots I want. I don't suppose you (or anyone) knows if they might bring out a longer lens at some stage? A 100-400mm lens would be absolutely perfect, lol. (perhaps I'm dreaming...)
All the best
Hobbes
 
I doubt Panasonic would do that anytime soon. I think there is a better chance that one of the longer sigma lenses appear with a m4/3 attachment (Sigma has promised to do something for m4/3 shooters). However, then it will be probably quite heavy, and you might consider going CANIKON instead from the get go. (or use a camera with your scope).

Niels
 
njlarsen said:
I doubt Panasonic would do that anytime soon. I think there is a better chance that one of the longer sigma lenses appear with a m4/3 attachment (Sigma has promised to do something for m4/3 shooters). However, then it will be probably quite heavy, and you might consider going CANIKON instead from the get go. (or use a camera with your scope).

Niels
Click to expand...

Thanks Niels. Just found the article re: SIGMA (http://www.dpreview.com/news/1102/11020915sigmacsclenses.asp). More research to do.... |=)|
Hobbes
 
pe'rigin said:
H2

Follow the link through.

http://panasonic.jp/support/global/cs/dsc/index.html

You'll find the lenses that fit with and without adapter, there's a few nice Olympus that will fit, but AF (C) doesn't work, worth a read through.
Click to expand...

Very helpful link. Thanks pe'rigin. I don't think there's anything there that's going to realistically get me more than 600mm reach but it's useful to see the options.
Thanks again
Hobbes
 
Hobbes,
I wondered if you are aware that the trick of limiting the pixel number for extra reach is also used in the GH2 if you are shooting jpg.

Niels
 
njlarsen said:
Hobbes,
I wondered if you are aware that the trick of limiting the pixel number for extra reach is also used in the GH2 if you are shooting jpg.

Niels
Click to expand...

Hi Niels
Ah, no, I hadn't realised that. What do you reckon is the maximum reach you can get out of the GH2 + 100-300mm lens, please?
Right, off out to actually look at some birds ;)
All the best
Hobbes
 
H2,

With the bigger lenses you'll going to have the same problems that DSLR have – supporting the weight. So you end up carrying tripod, head and an electronic shutter unit, defeating the idea of the 4/3 rds light weight equipment which you can carry in a pocket.

Plus light issues on the slower lenses, resulting in poor images.

Not an easy decision, I do think some of the 4/3rd cameras aren't quite good enough yet for quality of lenses made by Olympus. But it will be a growth market in the future.
 
Hobbes2 said:
Hi Niels
Ah, no, I hadn't realised that. What do you reckon is the maximum reach you can get out of the GH2 + 100-300mm lens, please?
Right, off out to actually look at some birds ;)
All the best
Hobbes
Click to expand...

In this review, 1/3 down, it says 2x (for the cost of a lower file size, of course) (search the text for Extended Tele Converter)

Niels
 
njlarsen said:
In this review, 1/3 down, it says 2x (for the cost of a lower file size, of course) (search the text for Extended Tele Converter)

Niels
Click to expand...

Thank you Niels. It looks like if you use the 100-300mm lens with the x2 extended zoom, you can get up to 1200mm reach (35mm lens equivalent)! Now that's tempting! The whole kit weighs around 920g which is amazing, when compared to the Fuji HS20 superzoom at 730g.

It's certainly tempting to give it try. It might be the next step on from my FZ8.
Thanks,
Hobbes
 
Warning! This thread is more than 13 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

njlarsen
G9-ii review
Replies
5
Views
488
njlarsen
njlarsen
W
DPReview shutdown
Replies
1
Views
536
Ted Y.
T
D
Roger Vine Zeiss 10x30 SFL review
2 3
Replies
59
Views
9K
lflip
L
Aquaplas
Reviews of Swarovski El 8,5x42
Replies
5
Views
2K
Alexander Stöhr
A
John A Roberts
Roger Vine’s review of the Zeiss Conquest 8x56 HD
3 4 5
Replies
83
Views
9K
dan31
D

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top