Panasonic GH2 as a "DSLR-Lite"

[keith_finger]

<p>I currently have a Canon 50D and several lenses, which I use with Canon's external battery holder. This can be a handful for casual shooting (especially when mated with my Sigma 70-200 2.8), so I'm looking for a more compact camera and a lens or two. Having easy-to-access controls for manual and aperture priority is important, as is image quality. Does anyone have any experience with the GH2? Would you consider it a good substitute for a DSLR for casual nature and city shooting where carrying a heavy camera/lanes combo isn't desired<br>

Thanks.</p>

 

[jcuknz]

<p>I don't know if it is a good substitue for a DSLR but that is where I am heading at the moment with my G3 .... but I am coming from an FZ50 as my most used camera though I have a D60 which is rarely used and appears to be redundant now. The D60 was purchased principally for use with extension tubes and bellows from film days. The G3 seems capable of surplanting it :-) </p>

[ariel_s1]

<p>This is what many people are doing nowadays. You may want to order from a place that allows returns so that you can test it out, but many, including me, are happy with it. I use a D200 as my main camera, and as my DSLR-lite I use a Panasonic G2, for the same reasons that you want a GH2. On-body controls, viewfinder, etc.</p>

<p>This is a fairly solid review, from a trusted photographer that uses Canon for much of his work:<br>

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/panasonic_gh2_first_look.shtml<br>

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

Plus, this E-P1 post by Thom Hogan, search for the one titled "Good Enough?:<br>

https://plus.google.com/112847428408357711502/posts<br>

And a last one:<br>

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/01/18/me-and-the-panasonic-gh2-by-amy-medina/</p>

<p>There are some downsides to micro 4/3 cameras. First, note that the sensor has a 2x crop factor. It's enough smaller area compared to DSLR that you have about 30% less area, but the image is more squarish (4:3 compared to 3:2) to take advantage of fitting inside the image circle. It's smart because it increases the area given the sensor circle, but it's also a tradeoff because you lose the panoramic-style images that are making the 5D and the D700 so popular (your 50D has the same aspect). Also, if you like bokeh, then it's that much harder to produce, because of the crop factor, and because of the circle of confusion difference. For example, a 45mm lens is a portrait lens on the GH2, but think of how deep your depth of field is when you shoot at that focal length. Still doable, but requires more thought. On the other hand, if you want depth of field, this is a godsend, as you can shoot wide open and still have a nice amount of the scene in focus, and you don't have to worry about diffraction to get that DOF.</p>

<p>If you're an anti-noise junkie, be careful, because noise isn't handled as well by these smaller sensors, and with less dynamic range, you have less exposure latitude before you start seeing it rear its ugly head in the shadows.</p>

<p>There are no really good zooms yet for the system. All you're going to have is a 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 and 45-200mm f/3.5-5.6, and both are consumer-oriented in regards to handling and image quality. Some of the primes are decent, some are not. The 20mm, 25mm, and 45mm are all pretty solid. The 14mm and 17mm are kind of a let down, but not unusable by any means. By the way, micro 4/3 is not any cheaper than Nikon or Canon intro-level offerings, so if you were hoping to save money by going smaller, then look somewhere else. A Canon T3i with an 18-55mm lens will cost less than a GH2 with 14-42mm lens.</p>

<p>Obviously, the shortcomings are yours to decide; I clearly decided that it's worth it, if I own a G2. So did those respected photographers that I linked to above, along with a slew of others. Oh, there's one last downside: to a large extent, on m4/3 forums, the users are much less educated and much more biased. The relentless brand wars are very annoying, as any mention of another camera is quickly derided, there is always talk about "the sheep that use CaNikon," etc. Conversely, look in the Nikon section at this thread titled, "Which camera?" and look at how objective and reasonable all the users are. No brand wars, and Nikon users praising Canon cameras. How relaxing! That would never happen on the micro 4/3 forums. Anyone that blindly loves one brand over another says more about that person than it does about a brand.<br>

http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00Zc42</p>

[GerrySiegel]

<p>I have a full size E-3 and the E-1 with battery grip. <em>For travel</em> I needed something light, but with good solid results. The GH 2 fits that definition for me. Panasonic has done a good job with this model. Especially with its incarnation of its movie mode. AND the ability to shoot in various formats. The sensor delivers results for me, and unit has enough modes and gizmos to satisfy anyone. I typically compose in the eye level electronic finder. It is small enough to pack, but still big enough that I can reach the buttons without squinting. Read some of the user reviews on Amazon to see why this model is so popular.....and has held its price. With the 20mm 1.7 it makes a great grab and run item. The flash is useful and sits high enough for a built in flash.....Panasonic design and their lens offerings though few are high quality. A 20mm and a 45 mm will do for a basic kit.....but you can get away cheaper if you are not interested at all in HD movies.....</p>

<p>from Amazon reviews, in part:</p>

5.0 out of 5 stars <strong>Best All Around Camera On The Planet</strong>, December 17, 2010

 

 

By

<a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/pdp/profile/A7FDGFK0KN7QG/ref=cm_cr_dp_pdp">B. Fuller</a> (United States) - <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/cdp/member-reviews/A7FDGFK0KN7QG/ref=cm_cr_dp_auth_rev?ie=UTF8&sort_by=MostRecentReview">See all my reviews</a><br /> <a onclick="return amz_js_PopWin(this.href,'AmazonHelp','width=340,height=340,resizable=1,scrollbars=1,toolbar=1,status=1');" href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html/ref=cm_rn_bdg_help?ie=UTF8&nodeId=14279681&pop-up=1#TR" target="AmazonHelp">(TOP 500 REVIEWER)</a> <a onclick="return amz_js_PopWin(this.href,'AmazonHelp','width=340,height=340,resizable=1,scrollbars=1,toolbar=1,status=1');" href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html/ref=cm_rn_bdg_help?ie=UTF8&nodeId=14279681&pop-up=1#RN" target="AmazonHelp">(REAL NAME)</a>

 

 

<strong>This review is from: Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 16.05 MP Live MOS Interchangeable Lens Camera with 3-inch Free-Angle Touch Screen LCD and 14-42mm Hybrid Lens - Black (Camera)</strong>

<p>Now I know that is a bold statement and I intend to back it up. However, before I do I need to explain what I mean. I am not saying this camera is the best at everything or even anyone thing. Cameras that are the best at something are usually specialized beasts that can really only do that one thing well. What I am talking about is a camera the is so good in so many categories that it can joyfully be used for just about and photographic or video graphic purpose you may have. The GH2 is that camera. Etc...(long detailed review continues.....)</p>

[jcuknz]

<p>If you are flexible of mind :-) and did by chance make the error of getting the G3 with its menus on the LCD AND in the EVF [ selectable from the body as well as touch screen ... take your choice :-) ] you could find it is no great hassle in practice and having found the selectable focus spot when using the LCD I think it is a great advance .... though true I have only had cause to use it once :-)<br>

There is the other lens not mentioned above, the 014140, which to me goes some way to equivalenting what I have with my FZ50 though the way it extends for 140 use is a bit alarming and I wonder if it is strong enough to carry a tele adaptor to get 500 or 616 AoV, rather shorter than the 950 AoV they give me on the FZ50. It is similar to what my Nikon 5700 has but a bit wider at the short end.<br>

Surely we can start an Olympus v. Panasonic war somehow ... It gets publicity like the Canikon one :-)</p>

[don_bizzaro1]

<p>I have the G2 and it's fine. The EVF one of the best, very clear. I bought the Pany 45-250mm lens and it takes some great shots, colors are vivid and deep. I do like the touch screen, I didn't think at first but find myself using it more and more. I dislike having to change lens when I travel and was thinking about getting a Canon G12 or the FZ150 from Pany. But the G12 is a lot bucks and the EVF on the FZ150 is small. I'll wait.</p>

[bob_meyer6]

<p>I've done just what the OP is asking about. I also have a 50D, and now a GH2 as well. I'm very happy with the GH2. I'd say I can rely on it for 90% of what I shoot.<br>

Is noise at high ISO worse than the Canon? Yes, but not as much as you might guess. And the images respond very well to LR3 noise reduction. And, truth be told, I rarely shoot at ISO1600 and even less often at 3200. At 800 and lower noise simply isn't an issue at all.<br>

AF tracking of moving object <em>moving toward or away</em> from you is still a weak spot of m43, but the GH2 is the best of the bunch, and good enough it's not a major issue for me. If you shoot a LOT of sports, it's probably not the right camera, but for most people I think the AF is good enough. Oddly, it does a better job of tracking moving objects in AF-S mode than in AF-C.'<br>

The flash system is certainly not as sophisticated as Canon's in terms of dealing with multiple flashes. But flash exposure is very accurate with a single on-camera flash. The Canon off-shoe cord II works with m43 system flashes, btw.<br>

The resolution of GH2 images is very impressive. The AA filter is relatively weak. I actually think the GH2 out-resolves the 50D.<br>

The biggest issue I've found with it is AF of moving objects in dim light. Shooting a wedding reception, for example. Partly it's the AF, and partly the absence of fast zooms. I'll still use my 50D and 2.8 zooms in that situation. But for pretty much everything else, I'm much more likely to pick up the GH2 now.<br>

Panasonic, btw, has announced 'fast' 12-35 and 35-100 lenses to be available sometime in 2012. Speculation is that the 12-35 will be at least f/2.8, maybe 2.5.</p>

<p>I currently use the following lenses, all Panasonic:<br>

7-14 Brilliant, sharp, contrasty. Fast AF. As good as any Canon lens I've ever used.<br>

14-45 Very good for a kit lens. I wouldn't hesitate to use it in any situation where the focal length and aperture are suitable. Fast, quiet AF<br>

45-200 A decent, very compact zoom for the price. A bit soft at the long end, but no worse than similarly priced tele zooms in any other system.<br>

14-140 My favorite 'walk-around' lens. At least as sharp as the 14-45. Fast AF. A bit heavy for m43. But outdoors, it's probably on the camera most of the time.<br>

20mm 1.7 Very sharp, very small and light. AF is a bit slow, but it's never been a problem for me.<br>

Oh, I also use a 50mm 1.5 Canon FD lens with an m43 converter. One of the advantages of m43 is the ease of using literally thousands of legacy lenses. Adapters are available for almost any mount you can imagine.<br>

Like I said, for 90% of what I shoot the GH2 is more than "good enough."</p>

[bob_meyer6]

<p>A couple of more thoughts: Airel S is not correct about the sensor in the GH2. It's a multi-aspect sensor, and can natively shoot in 4:3, 3:2, 16:9 and 1:1 formats. This isn't done by cropping from the standard 4:3 sensor. The camera has an oversize sensor that can actually use the maximum size of each format within the image circle of the lens.<br>

I also have to disagree with his comments on zoom lenses. The 14-42 is a fairly typical kit lens, but the available 14-45, 14-140 and 100-300 are quite good. And remember, that 100-300 has equivalent FOV to a 200-600 on FF!<br>

On the flip side, though, because of the smaller sensor, DOF is deeper than on a camera with a larger sensor. About two stops worth compared to FF, less than that compared to APS-C.</p>