[ManuH]

I needed to do a small video project and the GH2 + 14-42mm was available at a good price. I decided to try it because I had good experience in the past with the Panasonic FZ series. But my reaction is mixed.

The good:
- video looks really good and it's much easier to use an EVF for this.
- kit lens is surprisingly sharp and CA free at any FL and aperture.
- AF is unreal fast. I didn't expect CD-AF to be that fast, it's at least on par with any PD-AF I tried. Completely silent and 100% accurate. Face detection is useful. Only AF-C is still behind but it's at least very usable in video mode.
- It's lighter and smaller than any Pentax DSLR
- MF is easier thanks to well defined magnification. Focus by wire is actually nicer than most modern AF zooms.
- Love the multi aspect concept. This one of the reason I did go with the GH2 instead of the G3.
- Stereo mic with very good quality.

The bad:
- Ergonomics suck really bad. It makes me appreciate how good my K-5 (and any other Pentax) is in this regard. Just one example: in P mode you can shift with the rear dial but if you want to go back to automatic, the manual tells you that there 2 choices: either you turn on and off the camera or use the rear dial to go to the end of the P-shift. They don't know about the mighty Pentax Green Button. Menus are slow to traverse, and UI is ugly and confusing. Redeeming feature: the 3 fn customizable buttons.
- Just one dial. Surprising on what is supposed to be their top camera.
- The LCD is a touch screen but it's not really helpful unless for quickly selecting an AF zone.
- A lot of buttons and dials but not necessarily the one you want.
- There is a record movie button but you don't get access to all the video features. You need to use the dial mode for that. Confusing.
- Video is great but difficult to use. The options are messy, not well labeled. Maybe the hack will help.
- Sharpness is great but the sensor is clearly a notch (at least 1 stop) behind the K-5 in general performance. It also starts at iso 160 which is not helping IQ at base ISO.
- raw buffer too small (7 raws, not much more than a K-r).
- build quality too plastic (the FZ50 was much better IMHO). The kit lens is performing really well but the zoom action is certainly as smooth as the one on the Pentax.
- Loud shutter. OK the K-5 is in a class of its own but still... For a mirrorless camera it's a bit disappointing.
- x-sync even slower than Pentax: 1/160s.
- EVF is really good but you need to be perfectly centered otherwise there's a kind of CA appearing. And why put an EVF in the center of the camera? I have a big nose. Sony has a much better design with the Nex-7.
- No wireless remote. Come on, even the low-end Pentax have it. There is a cable remote but it's shared with the micro input. Cheap.
- Battery life quite low but this is kind of expected on a mirrorless.

In the end, it's an OK camera. It performs well and I can't praise the kit lens enough. But UI is disappointing meaning it gets often in the way and you spend too much time traversing menus and removing your eye from the viewfinder.

I'm pondering if I will return it or not. I'd like to at least try the 20mm f/1.7 but it's out of stock at B&H...

[normhead]

As a Pentax user I'd say "GH2- we don't need no stinking GH2s", but then, I'm probably not the guy you want for an objective opinion. To quote my SIoux brothers.."no man can tell another man what to do" That's about as philosophical as I care to get on this matter.

[Aegon]

If you do small video projects often, then it is a great option. Especially hacked.

The control wheel is also a push button, so for example if you were used to using a back wheel to adjust a first parameter and the front wheel to adjust a second parameter, you can adjust the first parameter, push the wheel, then adjust the second. That took me a while to get used to, but once you get there it isn't a significant hold-up.

I eventually sold my GH2 because I don't like the Panasonic look. I spent a lot of time twiddling settings trying to make photos look good. Panasonic frequently blows out the red channel, makes weird yellows, and comes out too warm for my taste. Once I started shooting Olympus I stopped using the GH2. Additionally, video isn't my priority.

However, if video was a priority then the GH2 is an easy choice. You've got to spend a lot of money to get better video than a hacked GH2.

[ManuH]

Yes, control wheel as a push button doesn't work too bad. But it's not quite the same as a direct access and two dials. Incidentally there's no TAv and of course no Hyper modes. But then I think Pentax is quite unique here.

For stills I'd be inclined to say the same as Normhead but I'd wish the K-5 AF were that accurate and the kit lens as good. For colors I'm shooting raw and process in LR so it shouldn't be a big deal. But the K-5 + Pentax glass is still superior IMHO.

As a side note, I prefer to criticize the GH2 on a Pentax forum than go in m43 forum and getting lambasted.

I'm going to install the hack soon for video. But as it is it's still far easier to use than the K-5 and it has full manual controls something Pentax refused to implement in the K-5.

[stormtech]

Being I own both a K-5 and a GH2, I can agree with most of your pros and cons, but......for me each has its intended use and I will be keeping both.

Ergonomics is the biggest issue for me as I have big hands - the K-5 is so nice to just hold.

And as far as images - yeah I'd say the GH2 is about 1 generation behind in the sensor department, but I shoot only raw, and after processing the GH2's raw images I am very pleased. In fact, I recently did a very non-scientific test just to see the differences. I had a juvenile finch at one of my feeders who just stayed there for 1/2 hour.

Here are the 2 images - I'll tell below the images which is which. Both images were cropped hard - almost 3x for both of them.





The first images was with the K-5 and FA* 300 4.5 hand held. Second image was with the GH2 and Panasonic 100-300 hand held.
I was really impressed that the GH2 image certainly stands up to that of the K-5 and a legendary Pentax lens.

Yes - I will be keeping both!

[Raffwal]

I owned a GH2 for a few weeks last year before selling it. I had bought it for video use and video was indeed very good, but I realized I don't really shoot that much video. Also, in the darkest winter I had difficulty in shooting sharp pictures in the house with the 14-140mm zoom. What I absolutely hated was the UI and menus. The most confusing and non-intuitive I have ever used. I have a theory that the software was made by two or three separate teams and then their components were just forced together. Yuck.

I don't think anybody can really decide for you, but in your place I might keep the camera if I did a lot of video, but not otherwise. If one wants to keep or start a µ4/3 system today, the Olympus sounds much more tempting.

[Aegon]

The menus are terrible. But there are 3 custom settings selectable from the PASM dial. Each setting controls both a picture mode and movie mode. If your workflow allows picture and movie modes to be independent then it is like having six modes on the dial. Setup one for high bit rate, one for extremely high ISO in B&W, and one for general purpose. Avoid the menus thereafter.

[jogiba]

Since I shoot in 1080p24 or 1080p30 24mb/sec manual video mode most of the time with my GH2 I don't have problems with menus since it stays in that setting most of the time. If I want to shoot 1080p60 28mb/sec mode I use my Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS20 or Panasonic TM700 3MOS camcorder.

[Biro]

To the OP: While I like the GH2, if the ergonomics are all wrong for you, there's nothing left to say. You should return the GH2. What next? I humbly suggest two options:

1) A Sony SLT A37 or A57, both of which feature the famous 16mp Sony sensor. It may be exactly the same sensor used on the Pentax K-5 and Nikon D7000 or a slightly updated version which I believe will be in the Pentax K-30. Plus the Sony cameras feature HUGE EVFs - the size of full-frame 35mm film camera OVFs - and the use of phase-detection auto-focus in all recording modes including video. The A37, which hasn't hit the stores yet, is about the size of a GH2. It's the same body used with the A35 and A55, so you can check them out. If you prefer a body about the size of a K-5, check out the A57.

2) Wait and see how good the K30's video is. It shouldn't be long before the professional reviews start hitting the Web.

[ManuH]

Yes the UI is pretty terrible. I used the legendary FZ50 in the past and that one had 2 dials and relatively good ergonomics. Removing the 2nd dial on the GH2 is a questionable decision.

The Sony SLT are OK but the big downside for me is that they are not adaptable like Nex or m43. Because I plan to use my Pentax glass on the GH2 for shooting video (I have a few sub-f/2.8 primes for low-light). The Nex-7 was also a consideration but the price and the general lack of good lenses for this system left me in a wait-and-see mode.

The K30 doesn't interest me that much. No EVF means shooting video with the LCD + Hoodloupe. It's OK but a bit cumbersome.

I installed the hack for the GH2. No change for the UI but the videos are really nice. Manual video mode is not too difficult to master.

[ManuH]

Finally I decided to keep it. Video is really good and ergonomically much easier to use than the K-5 for that use. I'm also getting intoxicated by the EVF. I think it has many advantages over an OVF. Yesterday I was shooting a person under a shade. On the EVF I could see immediately she was too dark compared to the background. Also MF gets you immediately a magnified view making MF extremely easy to achieve. And for video of course the EVF is the only game in town. The best would an hybrid VF like the Fuji X100.

The size (and most notably weight) of the GH2 is also a big plus. Especially for casual photography where ultimate IQ is not required. I was using a Samsung EX1 for that but the EX1 is too slow to operate in comparison, I lost many shots because of this.

I'm now waiting for a m43 adapter for my Pentax glass. That should improve video in low-light although I'm quite surprised how the kit lens is doing here in manual video mode (14mm f/3.5, 24p, 1/25s, ISO 6400). I now understand why people are screaming to get manual video mode on the K-5.

[Biro]

Congratulations on your decision. A good EVF is very useful - different from an OVF but with its own unique advantages. While I definitely plan to keep my Pentax gear, I will be looking at the specs of the GH3 when it is formally announced. I could be adding that or one of Sony's SLTs.

[ManuH]

Congratulations on your decision. A good EVF is very useful - different from an OVF but with its own unique advantages. While I definitely plan to keep my Pentax gear, I will be looking at the specs of the GH3 when it is formally announced. I could be adding that or one of Sony's SLTs.

I honestly don't see too much point in SLT unless you already have a lot of Minolta glass. For example I would buy a Pentax SLT if such thing existed because I already have 10+ lenses. In Sony land Nex seems a more sensible choice and you can even transform a Nex camera into a SLT with the adapter if you really wish to use Minolta glass.

I'm afraid the GH3 will not interest me much because it will probably be overpriced just like the GH2 at launch. And even today I feel the GH2 is a bit expensive for what it is (too much plastics).

After a few more days with the GH2 I'm getting a bit more used to the ergonomics but they still mostly suck except for some neat features like touch AF selection. The kit lens is not as good as I first thought, it's in the same ballpark as the Pentax kit I think. And the sensor is really much inferior to the K-5. By 1-1.5 stop most of the time and more than 2 at base ISO : unfortunately the GH2 cannot go lower than 160, just that makes the K-5 collect 2x more light (=1 stop) at base ISO. So even if the sensor was equal to the K-5 the GH2 would lose 1 stop. Even a slight underexposure and I get grainy blue skies on the GH2.

So in short, for stills, the GH2, most of the time, doesn't hold a candle to the K-5. Fit a K-5 with a nice small high quality zoom like the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 and you have a much superior combo (and cheaper too, just look at the price tag of the newly announced 12-35mm f/2.8).

But I'll keep the GH2 because I don't always need ultimate IQ, I'd like to use some of the great m43 lenses and some features on the GH2 are not available on the K-5. One advantage the GH2 can have is perfect AF accuracy with large aperture lenses which is always tricky with PD-AF systems (most of them cannot really see below f/2.8). And some lenses for that system are sharp wide open (Leica 25 f/1.4, Panasonic 20mm f/1.7, Oly 45mm f/1.8). I'll probably start with the 20mm, a FL I wish Pentax would provide at that speed and that size. Imagine a 26mm Ltd f/2.0 pancake. I would buy it on the spot.

[Tord]

Since a month back my wife have an OM-D, and I have had a Nikon V1 for a while, in addition to the K-5s, and other Pentax cameras (we also have a NEX-5N each). What really baffles me is the OM-D's magnificent video, even when carried around pretty carelessly. The V1 is superb in slow motion, and OK, otherwise. Or at least as good as my K-5 as a still camera!