This time we have a different kind of comparison. No noise or resolution test anymore, it’s time for a Quadcopter comparison made by 4to400.com (Click here). The reviewer found that the E-M5 stabilization works great and “Although I will say that the video quality of the two is very comparable. I did like the way the video looked straight out of the EM5 a bit more then the GH2 though.” But he still misses the 1080 at 60p recording on the E-M5.
By the way the Quadcopter mania is really growing! I know of more and more people buying or building their own Quandcopter. Here is a list of stuff on [shoplink 30762 ebay]eBay (Click here)[/shoplink]. But there are also [shoplink 30769 ebay]Tricopter (Click here)[/shoplink], [shoplink 30770 ebay]Hexacopter (Click here)[/shoplink], [shoplink 30771 ebay]Octocopter (Click here)[/shoplink]…. 🙂
P.S: 4to400 is represented by the company www.Quadrocopter.com.
—-
The GH2 is a real bargain in these days after multiple rebates (Click on store name): [shopcountry 16254] (P.S.: $749 at Amazon (Click here) with lens!)
E-M5 (Pre)order links (Click on store name): Amazon, Adorama, B&H, Jessops, Amazon UK, Amazon Germany, Amazon Japan and Digitalrev.
41 Responses
I have to get me one! 😀
I’m sorry, but i can’t remember the GH2 having 1080/60p recording..?
ADMIN – broken links in artical for ‘captors
Corrected! Damn iPhone WordPress application 🙁 So hard to work on it.
Interesting – but the GH2 has no 1080p60 as well.
Sorry, hacked GH2!!!
Since when does the hack enable 1080p60…?
Since never. Maybe he meant the 720p @ 60fps.
Sorry! Was an error!!! Removed it.
He probably was mistaken and should have said 1080/24p. 60p would be nice for slow motion though.
E-M5 on the left and GH2 on the right?
To me the colors of the right video look more realistic.
Whereas the left video looks sharper and more saturated.
Which one looks better to you?
I seem to agree, the gh2 colors are more muted, probably closer to reality.
The question is attractiveness, not fidelity i guess. I generally add a bit more saturation to the gh2 files shot in cinema mode anyway…maybe not as much as the oly cam though…
I like the color of em5 version, a lot more saturate than gh2.
But without download the original version you can tell there are more details on gh2.
Here are the 1920×1080 frame rates for a GH2 (hacked or stock).
NTSC at 1920×1080: 8P, 12P, 15P, 24P, 30P, 60i
PAL at 1920×1080: 8P, 12P, 15P, 24P, 25P, 50i
That is of course not including the 40 frames of burst in stills mode (which are shot at 40P).
If this guy prefers the video quality of the E-M5 over the GH2, perhaps he should stick to flying RC-copters.
You can tell from that video that one is so much better than the other that there is no room for personal preference? Remarkable. I thought it was a demonstration of the IS, because I cant make any video-quality conclusions from that video.
Well, that was my attempt at a joke.
But technically, no, there is no room for personal preference.
The GH2 is superior for video work, especially with Vitaliy’s hack.
However, if we were to view the video without any previous knowledge of cameras or post work, then the E-M5 shot would be preferable as it captures the blue sky and has a vivid feel.
I understand PK. Thats all the guy was claiming too… Straight out of the camera looked better on the Oly. If I have to have a background in video production to be able to tell which is better, then the differences arent big enough to matter to me. I respect that to some people they do matter but at what point does it become purely academic? Its like people who say a camera has poor image quality even though you can only see the difference when zoomed in to the point that individual pixels are visible.
Agree! The main problems on the E-M5 for video work are the absence of 24/25p and manual controls during capture, what is a shame IMO.
I’d rather have 60p than 24/25p any day. Actually I even prefer 30p.
At least we could have the choice. 24/25p looks much more cinematic to my taste. But no manual controls during video recording is really bad 🙁
Sure there are all types of appropriate frame rates for different situations. If your primarily going to broadcast, the 29.97 would be best. 60p, currently, is only applicable for slow motion, as there is currently no consumer mechanism / method to broadcast 60p. Peter Jackson is currently shooting The Hobbit on 3D and 48p, so will be the first major feature to depart from the 24p cinematic standard. The final product will be the true test if he was successful, but almost 100% of the people who have seen early test footage ranged from mild dislike to outright full on criticism of “the look”, but it can’t be certain that this stems from the use of 48p alone or perhaps unfinished color grading and VFX work (giving it the benefit of the doubt).
If I had to shoot something today with either of these cameras, it would have to be the GH2 despite any other advantages of the OM, simply because it can’t meet the basic requirements of my needs.
No manual control is a dealbreaker…
It does have manual control (or P or A or S, as you prefer).
GH2 has a much better resolution, look at the details when it shoots the circle of bricks. If it’s just the colors, the E-M5 has more saturated ones, it looks more attractive but you can change that quite easily in post-production. But without a doubt the IS on E-M5 is terrific! It looks like a steady cam.
@Fish,
for me, at least, the resolution and color GH2 has are both much better than E-M5’s.
and also agree with E-M5 stabilization is remarkable.
The one on the right perhaps has more neutral colors, but on my iPad screen, the sky looks completely blown out. The one on the left perhaps has slightly exaggerated colors, but then the sky at least has som shade of blue.
Watch it on a real screen.
The iPad screen *is* a real screen :-). I assume you mean a super expensive, 60 inch, optimally calibrated screen. So — you say on such a screen, the sequence on the right has a perfect, true blue color in the sky?
I assume on the left is OMD? Right?
The IS on the E-M5 is terrific! It feels like a steady cam, I wish they had told us which lenses they used, if the GH2 lens was a OIS one.
But the resolution on the GH2 is much better, you can see the details, the leaves, the circle of bricks, it’s much better. The color of the E-M5 looks more attractive, but the saturation you can change on post production so although the GH2 color looks more boring and the E-M5 has the edge, it’s not a deal breaker. Let’s wait for the GH3.
I wish they could make a hybrid camera, Olympus making the IBIS and Image Engine part and Panasonic the Video part, it would be a powerful camera.
One of the most interesting “tests” I have seen. The left side is obviously more stable. From what I read by the author, that is all the test shows clearly. That should translate to more stable (sharper) single pictures when handheld. Other reviews seem to agree on the E-M5. Everyone uses their camera a little differently and for me, low light IQ is important. I’m tired of slow shutter speeds and their inherent soft images.
Regarding the detail:
He states they were in 720p mode. So he probably just put them both to the 720p ‘high’ mode… which is 17Mbps on the GH2, and 13Mbps on the Olympus.
He should have set the GH2 down to 13mbps to match. Or he could have recorded them both at 1080p. (where the stock OM-D actually has a higher bitrate than unhacked GH2, 20mbps vs 17mbps), but to be fair could have used the ‘low’ bitrate on the OM-D, which matches the GH2’s high, 17Mbps.
He has another video of the OM-D in flight in 1080p mode, and you can see it clearly can deliver excellent detail. http://vimeo.com/41203058
I don’t think that he should have done that at all. You have to test the cameras have at their best, if not, since the GH2 doesn’t have IBIS, he shouldn’t have used that on the E-M5, right? It doesn’t make sense to step down the bitrate if GH2 is better just because Olympus didn’t care enough to put a better bitrate. And if the GH2 is hacked it will be way higher than just 17mbps, I think that the major focus of the test is just IS.
Thanks for that second video. It really shows what a fantastic work IS is doing. I´m impressed. The video quality I guess is good enough, atleast for non pros like me.
Wish he would have used the same lens. Different focal lengths on both cams, the OMD being zoomed in more. Useless comparison without same setup.
Useless? Oh, c’mon…
It was never said to be a scientific test and I hardly see how this was useless since we all can reach pretty fair and decisive conclusion, E-M5 IS is much better and GH2 has much better resolution and details, the color is different but you can easily change that on post-production, so it’s not so much of an edge. How is the test useless?
Sure, it would be nice if he had provided more data like focal length, which lens, aperture, shutter, but that doesn’t make this useless, you are just being very thick headed.
Exactly. He should have tested them at their best, 1080 high-bitrate.
Agreed! This comparison is completely useless except for accessing IS at work. Even so, different FLs will tax the IS system differently.
I’m amazed at how many posters are making considerations about IQ when they are seeing reduced resolution, differently toned and overly compressed video. I wonder if any of them has ever graded anything that came out of their cameras…
BTW, if anyone doubts, I’ve downloaded the original video and it’s still shitty quality left and right.
Why people still make use of to read news papers when in this technological globe
the whole thing is available on net?
Why would anyone buy the Olympus when it doesn’t really do anything better and costs nearly 2x as much as the GH2?