FORUMS: list search recent posts

60d vs. GH2 for Video

COW Forums : DSLR Video

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Marco Falcone
60d vs. GH2 for Video
on Dec 5, 2011 at 9:24:37 pm

Hey guys,

I was just wondering, which camera I should get? I'm going to be using the DSLR mostly for video, but I will also be taking pictures too. I've been looking on the internet, and it seems like everyone likes the GH2 better, and I agree. The video looks a lot better on the GH2, and with the 178mb hack, I was mind blown, something that never really happened to me during 60D. But what is your opinion? Anyone who has experience in them, please help! Is the GH2 worth the $300 price increase from the 60d (With 14-140mm lens)? Thanks.

______________________________________________________________________

“I don't believe in total freedom for the artist. Left on his own, free to do anything he likes, the artist ends up doing nothing at all. If there's one thing that's dangerous for an artist, it's precisely this question of total freedom, waiting for inspiration and the rest of it.” -FEDERICO FELLINI


Return to posts index

Jason Jenkins
Re: 60d vs. GH2 for Video
on Dec 5, 2011 at 10:40:08 pm

I have a lot of experience with the GH2, so you can ask me specifics about it; but I don't have any hands-on experience with the 60D.

Jason Jenkins
Flowmotion Media
Video production... with style!


Return to posts index

Marco Falcone
Re: 60d vs. GH2 for Video
on Dec 5, 2011 at 11:04:29 pm

How do you like the feel of the GH2, physically?

______________________________________________________________________

“I don't believe in total freedom for the artist. Left on his own, free to do anything he likes, the artist ends up doing nothing at all. If there's one thing that's dangerous for an artist, it's precisely this question of total freedom, waiting for inspiration and the rest of it.” -FEDERICO FELLINI


Return to posts index


Jason Jenkins
Re: 60d vs. GH2 for Video
on Dec 6, 2011 at 5:32:49 pm

[Marco Falcone] "How do you like the feel of the GH2, physically?"

It feels nice and solid. It's mirrorless, so it's quite a bit smaller than a 60D.

Jason Jenkins
Flowmotion Media
Video production... with style!


Return to posts index

Phil Balsdon
Re: 60d vs. GH2 for Video
on Dec 5, 2011 at 11:09:24 pm

The camera is simply a tool for you. Choose the one that you feel most comfortable with for your work and budget.

There's far more to image quality than pixels and bit rate and having the camera that feel best with is important. So is lighting, framing etc etc.

Consider also the implications and cost of changing systems, lenses in particular. EOS lenses don't play well with other systems. Also post workflow, audio etc etc. Does it work for clients that do their own post with your work? Take into account how much this will affect your budget and if it's reasonable for you change to the Panasonic. I've seen a lot of impressive footage from the GH2 online.

Also consider that camera technology changes and upgrades very quickly, so what you buy in the body will be superseded very quickly. Lenses however last a long time if you buy quality.

Cinematographer, Steadicam Operator, Final Cut Pro Post Production.
http://philming.com.au
http://www.steadi-onfilms.com.au/


Return to posts index

Brent Dunn
Re: 60d vs. GH2 for Video
on Dec 6, 2011 at 3:34:55 pm

I'm a fan of canon. I like the look of their lenses.

When you compare any camera, you need to do a side by side shoot to truly have an accurate image comparison. Otherwise, someone may have used proper lighting with one camera and bad settings on the other.

You'll be fine with both cameras, but as said earlier, if you already had canon lenses, you may be better off sticking with a canon camera.

Personally, if I had the budget, I wouldn't waste any money on another DSLR. I would go with the Panasonic AF 100.

Brent Dunn
Owner / Director / Editor
DunnRight Films
DunnRight Video.com
Video Marketing Toolbox.net

Sony EX-1,
Canon 5D Mark II
Canon 7D
Mac Pro Tower, Quad Core,
with Final Cut Studio

HP i7 Quad laptop
Adobe CS-5 Production Suite





Return to posts index


Jorden Mosley
Re: 60d vs. GH2 for Video
on Dec 7, 2011 at 12:54:27 am

I pondered this question recently. I went with the GH2 and it's the best decision I ever made.

Here's a few factors you may want to consider:

With the micro 4/3 mount (with an adapter) you have a lot wider selection of lens both old and new that you wouldn't on a canon (with adapters). So if you have a set of photography lenses already, chances are you'll still be able to used them on the GH2. If not, you could buy some old inexpensive lens off amazon or ebay for the fraction of the cost of newer lens (which image quality wise isn't too much different). You may pay more for the body of the GH2 but in the long run you'll save a lot more on lenses.

Recording time is not even close between the two. The 60D can only go up to 12min and it overheats. The GH2 has no recording limit. It will record until your card is full. Heck, just the other day I recorded 1hr 15min (on a 16gb card at 24fps 24bits) on 3/4 of battery life. I still had space left on my card and the GH2 wasn't even warm.

The GH2 has severely reduced moire and reduced rolling shutter. The best quality digital zoom I've seen out of any still camera (2X or 4X). And it has a image stabilization in the camera body (which will save you money on not having to get lens with IS).

The only thing video-wise I found about the 60D that had over the GH2 was the ISO performance under iso 1000. Canon's tend to let in more light at the lower ISOs. But 1000-3200, image quality wise I prefer the GH2's. At iso 3200 under the right circumstances you can still have a good image.

So if you can grab a GH2, do it. It's a great camera.


Return to posts index

Peter J. DeCrescenzo
Re: 60d vs. GH2 for Video
on Dec 7, 2011 at 10:11:38 am

[Jorden Mosley] "... The GH2 has ... a image stabilization in the camera body (which will save you money on not having to get lens with IS). ..."

As a long-time GH1 & GH2 user I can assure you these cameras do _not_ have in-body image stabilization.

Some of Panasonic's Lumix brand lenses include optical image stabilization, but their Micro Four Thirds camera bodies do not.

I'm not certain, but I think some Olympus m43 bodies feature in-body IS.

Other than the GH1/GH2 not supporting live audio monitoring during recording, there's very little I don't like about using these cameras for shooting video. I prefer using prime (SLR-type) lenses in full manual mode, but I also get good results with my Lumix auto AF/AE lenses, too.

Many competent users report getting superior digital _stills_ shooting with Canon DSLRs & Canon L-series lenses, and I believe them.

My take is the GH2 -- especially a hacked GH2 -- is the "DSLR" video king, but Canon cams can have an advantage if taking higher quality stills with the same cam (probably at a higher system cost) are a high priority. Cheers.

---

http://www.peterdv.com


Return to posts index

Jorden Mosley
Re: 60d vs. GH2 for Video
on Dec 9, 2011 at 4:12:32 pm

I look over my camera settings again, and yep, I was wrong. I thought the "Stabilizer" setting was for the body. But soon I as put a different lens in my camera, it didn't have that option. Sorry about the incorrect info on the IS.


Return to posts index


Malcolm Matusky
Re: 60d vs. GH2 for Video
on Dec 14, 2011 at 10:54:58 pm

I have a 7D and canon lenses; if I was specking out a rig for primarily video shooting I would lean heavily to the GH2 rather than a Canon/Nikon. The GH2 has an EVF built in, no need for the external magnifer, keeps the size of the rig smaller.

M4/3 mount, can take ANY lens, from SLR to Leica M, to PL mount, this is an amazing feature and this is the only camera of it's quality to do so, so far.

I saw a hack that used Super 16 lenses by sampling the center of the chip, though still 1080P, this looks very cool if it's a practical thing to do. There are a lot of great zooms available used for the S16 format. None of them will ever work with a DSLR as the sensors are too large.

This is a great "B" camera to the AF-100, all your glass will work just as well with the AF-100, except perhaps S16 lenses.

If you are looking to upgrade later from the DSLR format, the AF-100 is a great step up for $5k, the C-300 with the EOS mount is $17~20k so a much farther move up financially. Panasonic has a better (affordable) next step for someone using a DSLR than any other manufacturer to date.

I think for an Indie filmmaker the GH2/AF-100 is a great combination. If Berger ever gets their mount adapter done it will be a good choice for canon lens owners as well.

Malcolm
http://www.malcolmproductions.com


Return to posts index


<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]