Any ex-canon users disappointed with GH2?

The 7D does quite well for stills. I have shot a 7D for a year plus and the 5DII for 2-1/2 years.

7D highlights clip sooner than the 5DII highlights.
5DII is about 1 stop better w.r.t. to image noise at high ISOs.
Autofocus is far better on the 7D. The higher frame rate for stills is quite good with the 7D.

I find the two cameras complement each other well side by side, I use both for marketing, ad work, architecture, food, people and video projects for clients. Having the full frame for wider shooting larger file size along with the cropped sensor for longer telephoto, faster frame rate in stills makes for a great combo to over just about anything I need.

I probably won't even take stills with the GH2 anytime soon, just don't care, don't have the need. GH2 for me is just for video at the moment.
 
photonashville said:
The GH2 has no way of zooming in to check focus as far as I can tell which I find very necessary. It's a snap on the Canons.
Click to expand...

It does. It doesn't have a button that's set to do it out of the box like the GH1, but you can set a function key to bring up focus assist.
 
photonashville said:
The 7D does quite well for stills. I have shot a 7D for a year plus and the 5DII for 2-1/2 years.

7D highlights clip sooner than the 5DII highlights.
5DII is about 1 stop better w.r.t. to image noise at high ISOs.
Autofocus is far better on the 7D. The higher frame rate for stills is quite good with the 7D.

I find the two cameras complement each other well side by side, I use both for marketing, ad work, architecture, food, people and video projects for clients. Having the full frame for wider shooting larger file size along with the cropped sensor for longer telephoto, faster frame rate in stills makes for a great combo to over just about anything I need.

I probably won't even take stills with the GH2 anytime soon, just don't care, don't have the need. GH2 for me is just for video at the moment.
Click to expand...

well, that's all right. I think the point is, that the 7D looks and feels like a professional tool. The GH2 not.
 
aemonk said:
are there any comparisons on the web where you can actually see how much better canon 7D/60D/t2i stills are than still from a GH2??
It seams to be obvious that canon APS-C cameras are better for stills than a micro4/3 chiped GH2. I own the 7D and the GH2 and I can't confirm that. The current canon APS-C censor is not that good.
Click to expand...

There aren't any. Here's a series of links I posted in another thread. For a frame of reference, I use both my 7D and GH1(3) for video _and_ stills, so I'm not biased either way.

Here's a good read from a pro-photog who uses the GH1 and now GH2 http://www.luminous-landscape.com/re...evisited.shtml
Another landscape photog's review of the GF1 http://www.davidclapp.co.uk/blog/rev...landscape.html
Check out the GF1 in EJ's equipment list (he speaks very highly of it in the Naturescapes forums) - http://www.ejphoto.com/Equipment.htm
G10 vs H2 + P45+ back http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/kidding.shtml
 
Last edited:
awelgraven said:
It does. It doesn't have a button that's set to do it out of the box like the GH1, but you can set a function key to bring up focus assist.
Click to expand...

I just figured out that with a manual lens, EOS lens in adapter that clicking the toggle wheel brings up the zoom in to check focus. One down more to go. I do like figuring out how to maximize my experience with the camera, that's why i have no desire to bash it, I just want to find out the solutions I need.
 
photonashville said:
The SD card file structure is down right silly. Sure I copy the whole thing and Log and Transfer but really, is all that necessary. All I need from a Canon is a .mov file.
Click to expand...

I take it you don't have a Bluray player that can take SD cards? The AVCHD file structure conforms to one of the Bluray specs.
 
roei z said:
Doesn't stop me from getting superb results, which is what really matters.
Click to expand...

This is getting to sound like automobile 'arguments'... I use a vehicle to get from point A to point B, where walking, public transport, would be long and arduous... I don't buy a car for the 'pro look', or 'feel'... I especially don't buy a car for the price tag to impress my friends and neighbors...

The only thing I just came across after a year of having the GH-1 that I'd 'really like', is the live HDMI output, and I don't care about all the info icons, and status indications... in fact that would help me as well. I want to be able to demonstrate lighting setups, and it would have been nice to have the live HDMI output to show the students, via a big screen TV, what's going on from the camera POV... as it is I have to snap a shot, then go to 'display mode' on the GH-1... I think GH-2 has the live view capability... and no I have no interest in capturing the HDMI output... except perhaps for its pedagogic usefulness.
 
photonashville said:
The GH2 has no way of zooming in to check focus as far as I can tell which I find very necessary.
Click to expand...

1- With Lumix lenses set the GH-2 to "manual focus" with the lever on the top left side of the camera, and the camera will automatically zoom in when you are focusing a Lumix lens. ( no idea if this works for Olympus lenses )

2- With manual lenses like Nikon / Canon / Etc... Press the "scroll-wheel" on the top right side of the back of the GH-2 to toggle manual focus zoom, then press the wheel again to return to normal view.

photonashville said:
The SD card file structure is down right silly. Sure I copy the whole thing and Log and Transfer but really, is all that necessary. All I need from a Canon is a .mov file.
Click to expand...

Use an NLE that does not require TransCoding. Final Cut Pro is the author of it's own TransCoding problems, though it sounds like this is all going to be sorted out very soon with the release of Final Cut Pro 8. ( or switch to Adobe Premiere CS5 for the Mac, or install Windows 7 on your Mac and use Sony Vegas Pro 10 )

FYI: I owned a Canon 60D for 5 months ( beautiful stills camera ) but sold it last month because I much prefer the video output of my GH-2. The Micro 4/3 lens issues should sort themselves out this year, with so many manufacturers jumping on board. Fast Wide and Fast Zoom is what all of us are waiting for.

Right now I'm using the sharp, steady, and slow Lumix lenses ( 14-45mm, 45-200mm, I sold off the 14-140mm as I prefer smaller lenses if they are not fast ), Voightlander Nikon ---> Micro 4/3 adapter with manual Nikon lenses. Later this Spring I plan on buying the Voightlander 25mm f/0.95 super speed and a Zeiss ZF.2 50mm f/1.4 Nikon mount. And maybe the Zeiss ZF.2 85mm f/1.4 Nikon mount if I can find a use for it.
 
j1clark@ucsd.edu said:
This is getting to sound like automobile 'arguments'... I use a vehicle to get from point A to point B, where walking, public transport, would be long and arduous... I don't buy a car for the 'pro look', or 'feel'... I especially don't buy a car for the price tag to impress my friends and neighbors...
Click to expand...

Small size is clear advantage in many situations. It's more portability, it takes less space in your travel pack especially in you have few cameras and heaps of other equipment, it's ideal for long walking trips where weight matters. You can shoot secretly or pretend to be a tourist in public places without worrying to be asked for a permission to shoot and other problems of that kind. It also means less fatigue for long handheld shots.

But on the other hand, if that's your main or only camera and you doing a paid job and it doesn't look pro enough in customer's opinion you have to be ready to answer WTF type of questions. Hey, I've hired a pro, but what are you kid doing here with your toy?
 
Last edited:
Come to the conclution that most of these cameras are similar if not the same, if you listen carefully you'll even hear that there is already some claim that the GH? made in japan has a better sensor than the one made in Libya or India. Soon you'll hear that those made in Kyushu are better than those in Hokaido.
These cameras do the job in able hands, with different preferences which are not pros or cons, while a paparazi videographer finds it easy to sneak a gh? into a guarded fort and thus is able to put some extra bread onto his dinning table by producing stunning images from inside the fort, the same applies to a wedding videographer who by not just producing stunning images, but also manages to convince the next wedding couple that he/she is serious in what he/she is doing by using professional 'looking' tools.
 
qap15 said:
Come to the conclution that most of these cameras are similar if not the same, if you listen carefully you'll even hear that there is already some claim that the GH? made in japan has a better sensor than the one made in Libya or India. Soon you'll hear that those made in Kyushu are better than those in Hokaido.
These cameras do the job in able hands, with different preferences which are not pros or cons, while a paparazi videographer finds it easy to sneak a gh? into a guarded fort and thus is able to put some extra bread onto his dinning table by producing stunning images from inside the fort, the same applies to a wedding videographer who by not just producing stunning images, but also manages to convince the next wedding couple that he/she is serious in what he/she is doing by using professional 'looking' tools.
Click to expand...

The Wife and I shot for years with lower end Nikons. The only time whe had the 'higher end' ones, was when she got some demo units to shoot for a brochure. But none of those would match up to the Nikon F and the ability to not only shoot pictures, but use the camera as a mace in a tight situation... sometimes weddings do get a bit wild...

Back in the darkages we did show up with the Hasselblad, a full blown studio strobe and attendant flashhead, stands, umbrellas... but as time went on we dropped all of that to just digital 35mm Fujifilm S2/3/5's... I don't recall anyone kicking us out of an event because we didn't 'look' professional... come on... I'd even wear a tie for god's sake... (The Fujifilm cameras were built on several different Nikon frames, but not the big ones... more on the 'consummer/prosumer' frames...).

The 'seriousness' should be obvious from the samples shown the prospective client...
 
I recently made the switch from a 7d to to the GH2 and there is much that I miss, although I think most of it has been in covered in previous posts. I felt like the LCD on the 7d gave me a much better idea of the exposure and white balance than I'm getting with the gh2. IMO the lens selection with Canon is simply far superior. I know I can adapt almost any lens to the GH2 (honestly I never really had any issues using adaptors with the 7d either) but if you want to take stills with auto focus or use a decent OIS than you will find yourself without many options. This is something that I miss terribly! Hopefully someone releases a decent lens with OIS for the mft crowd. I've also noticed that the GH2 image is more prone to that jello-wobble. Outside of those issues, as well as the quality of build, where there is no comparison, the GH2 is better in every regard; it offers a much cleaner, sharper final image.
 
westmon said:
I recently made the switch from a 7d to to the GH2 and there is much that I miss, although I think most of it has been in covered in previous posts.
Click to expand...

I also made the switch recently! I don't miss anything.

westmon said:
I felt like the LCD on the 7d gave me a much better idea of the exposure and white balance than I'm getting with the gh2.
Click to expand...

Disagree! I often found myself missing exposure when going by the 7D's LCD, especially when in daylight (even with a Z-Finder). With the GH2's awesome EVF, though, I've been consistently getting what I want. The EVF on the GH2 is far, far superior IMO to the 7D's LCD. It has 50% more resolution and isn't glossy.

westmon said:
IMO the lens selection with Canon is simply far superior. I know I can adapt almost any lens to the GH2 (honestly I never really had any issues using adaptors with the 7d either)
Click to expand...

Yes you can adapt lenses to the 7D, but not nearly as many as you can adapt to the GH2. However, M4/3 is undeniably a still growing format with regards to affordable fast wide glass, but other than that segment there are plenty of options. What lenses on the 7D would you like to work on the GH2? I'm sure there are some M4/3 alternatives.

westmon said:
I've also noticed that the GH2 image is more prone to that jello-wobble.
Click to expand...

That's funny, I got the opposite reaction. But, I think it's been scientifically proven that the rolling shutter is essentially the same between the Canon's and the GH2.

westmon said:
Outside of those issues, as well as the quality of build, where there is no comparison, the GH2 is better in every regard; it offers a much cleaner, sharper final image.
Click to expand...

I honestly don't see why so many diss the GH2's build quality. For what it is (a small, lightweight camera) it would be impossible to improve the build quality without compromising one of those two things - which I, at least, am not willing to do, as I buy cameras for pictures and not for their construction materials.

As for the image quality, it is so obviously superior to the Canon's that I'm surprised there is any debate whatsoever about whether videographers/filmmakers should be using one or the other. The GH2 is obviously better in every way for video, it's that simple.
 
It is true that because ethe GH cameras are light, they feel like they're probably flimsy, but I've yet to have something break or fall off my GH1, and although I'd prefer it to be heavier and more substantial feeling like the Canons, it isn't actually badly built at all.
 
I chose to keep my 7D for still images. The GH2 has not produced a single image that really could deliver the DR or detail the 7D is capable of. I was really hoping for an all out solution in one body but the GH2 still engine or sensor is not up to the task.

Video wise the detail is great but I would not call the 24H mode better than the 24 canon, I feel there is still too much artifacting in this codec and loss of shadow detail. Still however its a very good image and highly usable in detail and most situations.

If it gets hacked to improve bitrates the GH2 would be very close to a perfect 24p and 30p cinema capture device!
 
JamesBenet said:
Video wise the detail is great but I would not call the 24H mode better than the 24 canon, I feel there is still too much artifacting in this codec and loss of shadow detail. Still however its a very good image and highly usable in detail and most situations.
Click to expand...

There must be something wrong with your camera then, because the GH2 has been scientifically demonstrated to have a far more robust codec with far less artifacting when compared to the Canons.
 
JamesBenet said:
The GH2 has not produced a single image that really could deliver the DR or detail the 7D is capable of.
Click to expand...

Interesting statement and worded actually pretty slippery-ly.

The 7d is capable of much indeed. But it 's like riding a 1000cc superbike; you don't need to open it up all the time. In fact in competent hands you can make it fly like a hawk on steroids at half the output. The Gh2/Gh1 is more like a 750cc/600cc. Lighter, more nimble and yes at full output cannot catch the 7d in full output.

But I live in the real world. And specs like maximum capable horsepower are nothing more then illusions to sell more bikes to geeks who don't know better.
 
Come on above if we are talking detail resolution the canon is more like dvd compared to blu ray,i owned a 550D,Color look is always personal taste and can be made to suite yourself,i will never knock the canons for color though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top