Three very interesting Panasonic GH2 AF speed test videos!
Panasonic GH2 autofocus speed test on follwing three lenses:
Panasonic GH2 – AF in low light test
Panasonic GH2 Light Speed AF Test (AFC)
So what do you think about the AF performance? Very fast and precise or not?
Thanks Jesper
Share
Recent comments
Comment from Mike: Argh. Totally forgot about lack of IBIS....
Comment from spanky: Same comment I made in the other thread ...
Comment from Chris K: True, it won't be lighter than Four Thir...
Comment from david: A birding kit's weight is lens-dominated...
Michael
2 years ago |Seems pretty good!
addieleman
2 years ago |Pleasantly surprised by the AF speed of the 20/1.7. Leica 25/1.4 is also very good IMHO. I’d like to see what happens with older FT lenses that were not meant to be used with contrast-detect AF.
Angry Olympus Owner
2 years ago |+1 here,
I think the gh2 may handle older zuiko better then the pens do
Jules
2 years ago |So far so good. Excellent speed for relatively basic tests.
At one point, some tests will reveal short comings (which is perfectly fine) I am looking forward to know the limits of this new camera!
Boris
2 years ago |Forget about video!
Just look at the image samples in this review (in czech language). They are probably the best I’ve seen among the
mirror-less cameras.
http://www.grafika.cz/art/df/hands-on-preview-panasonic-lumic-gh2-2010.html
Milos
2 years ago |Thanks Boris, i can see real world performance.
It looks to be on par with APC at higher ISO’s but i can see noise in shadows even on ISO 100
Eric
2 years ago |I just saw this in the DPR forum, those ISO samples certainly deserve their on post on this site. They look amazing. Clean ISO1600, good ISO3200, and I can use ISO6400 for grainy B&W’s. The AF speed + these ISO test have made me do a 180 on this camera. Aside from the way it looks (although it does look better than the G1/G2/GH1) I love everything about this camera. I’d like to have a faster flash sync speed and weather seals, but I can live without that.
Zonkie
2 years ago |Strange, I don’t see improvement myself in those samples. It still has noise in the shadows at base ISO and it looks rather unusable at ISO 3200 (and ISO 1600 is usable, but not great).
We’ll have to wait for more tests and comparisons, but it’s looking worse than the GH1 to me so far.
Zonkie
2 years ago |Sorry, I correct myself. I was looking at ISO 6400 thinking it was 3200, and to ISO 3200 thinking it was ISO 1600.
So yes, ISO 3200 is usable but not great. Maybe a bit better than GH1? Difficult to say.
Angry Olympus Owner
2 years ago |800 and 1600 are very impressive when compared to my E3, if this this camera had inbody IS it would be a low work horse with a F2
I hope Oly comes out with a cam using this sensor a 12mp sensor that can perform at least as good as this
I really look forward to seeing how this performs with older zuiko glass
Mike
2 years ago |Argh. Totally forgot about lack of IBIS… There go my fantasies of this camera being my next upgrade. Will have to wait for the high-level Olympus body. Hopefully they get things right, even if it takes them a while to do so.
spanky
2 years ago |Same comment I made in the other thread above: there’s significant loss of sharpness and detail even at ISO 400, which is not good. It may be good enough for general purpose photography, but not for any sort of serious work.
richard
2 years ago |Are those AF without press the shuttle button? if so that is much faster than GH1, 20mm 1.7 was terrible in auto af.
Frosti7
2 years ago |one word WOW
NativeFloridian
2 years ago |Wow indeed. That focus speed blows away my EPL1. I’m very impressed. It is a good step forward for CDAF.
Chris K
2 years ago |Brain-dead easy AF-C targets. I would like to see someone successfully track birds in flight with a GH2 before I judge its AF-C performance. Even large, nearby birds were difficult enough to track with my GH1+14-140 that I got better results using AF-S, a small aperture, and pumping focus. Which isn’t a workable solution for BIF, of course.
So, I’d like to see AF-C samples in:
* Smaller targets
* More chaotic movement
* Lower light
* Cluttered backgrounds
* Tracking for a more than a few seconds
* Shooting while tracking, to see if the camera can retain focus
That last issue is what kills the GH1 for AF-C performance for me more than anything. As soon as you push the shutter, the camera stops focusing, the viewfinder blanks out, and you have to start all over. Compare that with my DSLRs, which have a few milliseconds of blackout and loss of focus (but continue to predict and retain lock during that time!).
I hope M43/EVF cameras get to a point where they can match traditional OVF/phased array SLRs for continuous AF performance, because I’d love to retire my >9 lbs birding kit in favor of a GHx that would surely weigh half as much. But until we get a camera that can maintain a lock on a challenging object in motion while shooting, I’ll have to stick with my enormous, heavy, expensive DSLRs
Eric
2 years ago |It might be a while before it’s good enough for you wildlife guys, but for a street and portrait shooter like myself it is clearly fast enough for anything I need.
david
2 years ago |A birding kit’s weight is lens-dominated, and micro-4/3 isn’t going to give any significant weight advantage when using a big telephoto. (Or rather, it won’t have any advantage other than the standard 4/3 advantage of a 2x crop factor.)
Chris K
2 years ago |True, it won’t be lighter than Four Thirds DSLRs, but it will be lighter than APS-C or larger. I’d even be willing to give up some IQ, if only the M43 kit could keep up in AF and shot-to-shot performance.
I really don’t WANT to carry a large camera kit like I do right now. I do it out of necessity. If I could get a lens similar to Canon’s 100-400/5.6 or Sigma’s 100-300/4 (and a TC) on a M43 body with good continuous AF and shot-to-shot performance, I’d be able to leave my bigger, longer kit at home quite often. 800mm-e isn’t all that much for wildlife, but it’s long enough that I could live with it.