Personal View site logo
AG-AF100 vs. GH2 final round
  • 35 Replies sorted by
  • AriaAria
    Meh, I think the GH2 looked great. What was going on with the skin tones on the girls arms in the AF100 footage? That looked terrible. There is this pink hue that doesn't look right at all. The GH2 had a slight resolution edge to me as well. I don't think there was enough of a difference in image to be honest. Depends on your needs. For a person who does his own projects i'd stick with the GH2.
  • AdRAdR
    I'd like to see a comparison between AF100 HD-SDI and GH2 on green screen, and in color grading. I'd expect that the 4:2:2 Prores from a Samurai would key better than 4:2:0 AVCHC from the GH2. Also interested in seeing how far you can push them in color grading before they start to get ugly.
  • stoneystoney
    @LPowell I think both used 14-42.

    @kazuo I think lens coating, sensor, and image processing all contribute to skin color.

    GF3 + 14-42X gave skin tone closer to AF100's. GF3 < G3 < GX1 in terms of skin tone color. We wouldn't need to worry about skin tone from upcoming new m43 cameras.

    Older models get benefit of X lenses, too. Nice skin tone from GF1... I mean GF1!!!! Olympus 45mm 1.8 gives good skin tone, too.


    One thing about nano coating. 14-42X gathered 1/3 stop more lighting than 14mm pancake. I love X.
  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev
    >One thing about nano coating. 14-42X gathered 1/3 stop more lighting than 14mm pancake. I love X

    Sounds weird.
    All modern multicoatings are different only slightly.
    Plus you have more air-glass pairs in zoom.
  • stoneystoney
    I thought it was weird, too. The zoom has more complex optic structure, but it did gather more lighting than the prime. There was 1/3 stop EV gain reading from the camera when I was testing it out.

    image
    "Nano Surface Coating minimizes reflection through the entire visible light ange (380 to 780nm)". I took that as more lighting through the lens. The only downside of nano coating over multi coating was less aesthetic lens flare.
  • LPowellLPowell
    I'm puzzled by this lens coating discussion. Regardless of what it's coated with, how could the same lens cause a yellowish color cast on the GH2 and a pinkish color cast on the AF100?
  • stoneystoney
    I'm just saying newer m43 lenses mitigates the skin tone issue of GH2. It doesn't eliminate the yellowish or greenish or bluish skin tone entirely, but it looks better.

    GF3 gives much better skin tone than GF1 where they share same sensor. Hmmm. I guess there are many factors affecting the final color.
  • olegkalyanolegkalyan
    Finally I put together a little test, have both cameras, actually two GH2 hacked to the latest Driftwood masterpiece.
    AF100 brighter about a stop, less contrastier. I couldn't figure out what setting to put GH2 to. Tries cinema, nostalgic, for some reason GH2 always look quite noisier at iso 400, actually there was a Nikon 5100 by the side, that looked quite similarly to GH2 with much more moire, at bright straight lines.. I had to lower the pedestal to -5 to compensate the difference in exposure and raise the contrast on AF100, to look similarly to the other two.
    Surprisingly DD was higher on AF100, getting details in shadow areas..
    My assistants were beside me to conform my findings.. video results quite soon!
  • imdjayimdjay

    any update?

  • Brian202020Brian202020

    No update. Been busy with work and family. Plus I'm beginning to think the test is pointless.

Add a Comment