Considering Either GH2 or T3i

It's largely a matter of personal choice. The "cinematic look" vs. "video look" argument is becoming a bit irrelevant. The larger frame motion picture film formats, Vista Vision and all were film producers way of trying to produce a sharper, crisper film "look" which has a much different "look" than 1940's - 1960's softer "cinematic" look.

The "true" cinematic look is more dependent on things like lighting, set design and visual things done so the camera could capture the wanted "look". And now even the "sacred" HOLY of 24fps is looking to become obsolete with "The Hobbit" being shot at 48p plus several producers are looking at 60p all with an eye towards coupling 4K with significantly smoother motion.

There are arguments about whether THAT can have a "cinematic" look.

For my part, once I saw the detail Bruce Dale got in "Summer Morning" I was hooked. I've ALWAYS wanted sharpest imaging I could achieve, worked with medium format back in the early 1960's, when I turned professional I almost dumped 35mm except for the need to produce 35mm color slides on occasion, Hasselblad and Mamiya RB67 delivered the negative quality I had to have.

So when I saw what sharpness and rendition of detail the GH2 could achieve, I sold off my Canon DSLRs and converted to GH2. So some feel with "native" glass it is too sharp. I dug out my old set of Cokin diffusion filters and initial tests seem to indicate I can get the desired degree of softening very easily. The set I'd accumulated was almost a graduated set of five ranging from extremely subtle to "don't even try to focus through this one". They were only marked in two strengths but they varied enough so that the markings weren't accurate.

So essentially I have the sharpness and detail I want in HD video but I can also shoot as soft as I want as I did in my studio days on 120 Vericolor Professional films.

My choice is the GH2 and I haven't given up anything with stills either.
 
The GH2 footage is amazing, and the GH3 is even better. I'll take sharpness and dynamic range over supposed "cinema look." Besides, you can always dial up DOF with choosing the right lens, careful lighting and use of ND filters. I am a longtime and experienced Canon T2i x 2 user, and if I was buying my first DSLR right now, it would be either a GH2 or GH3.
 
So that my post above Marco's is not taken to paint me as a GH2 "fanboy", The Canons with the 7D, T2i, 60D, T3i, and now the T4i are all absolutely amazing DSLR's (the T1i was a screaming disaster video wise).

Anyone currently looking at the T4i would be very well served by this camera. We all make our own choices and our choice does not "diminish" the choice others make.

GH2 or a Canon? Whatever the buyer wants. I can work with either.
 
Bruce Foreman said:
when I saw what sharpness and rendition of detail the GH2 could achieve, I sold off my Canon DSLRs and converted to GH2
Click to expand...

...I did the same thing. I had been a Canon fan for a number of years, then sold everything after owning the GH2 for a couple of months.

The C100 looks very interesting, and I might switch to one in the future if I can afford it.
 
A little late to this, but I also have both the GH2 and T3i, and how I choose is mostly dependent on subject matter and lens choice. The GH2 is definitely sharper, especially with ETC but I have a much better choice of lenses for the Canon, especially f2.8 zooms. The new f2.8's from Panasonic will help a lot, but right now, I have f2.8 zooms covering all the way from 11mm to 300mm.

Focus peaking with Magic Lantern on the T3i is also a very nice feature.
 
not sure if anyones said this yet. but if you can id hold out and see wat the GH3 has up its sleeve...
 
Samuel H said:
Canons are getting old
Click to expand...

Yes it will be great if Canon makes some real improvements on the next round of aps-c cameras. New cameras like the BMCC will be great when they work out all the manufacturing and distribution details, but still no high frame rates.
My 60D is still making money and going strong after 24 months of constant use and abuse. The rubber is half off and the HD picture is starting to look soft compared to the latest competition but still brings home the bacon. It looks like the GH-3 will still lack NTSC/PAL switchable which kills it for me since I travel regularly between 50/60 Hz countries. If they just up the resolution detail a bit I would gladly upgrade to the next unit for a daily driver. For higher end projects I can still rent what ever I need and since the new gear is changing every day it will probably coat way less in the long run.
 
I have used both extensively and I almost always thought the gh2 was the better camera. However, I am not a huge fan of working with it and the menu is not great. I find the 5d mark ii and t2i almost unusable unless it is a tight shallow dof shot. With that being said, I recently bought a mark 3 and I don't think I will be using the gh2 that much anymore. The lowlight, the full frame look, and simply using Canon lenses natively is awesome.

I don't have anything to show yet with the mark 3 but here is some gh2 and t2i footage:
Wide shot with gh2 and then tight shot with t2i:
https://vimeo.com/50552897
And this is all gh2:
https://vimeo.com/47360518

I think there is a reason that the Canon's became so popular. Cameras like the EX1 had the HD crisp video look figured out but people soon realized that this wasn't everything. They wanted that filmic look and they were doing all kinds of things to achieve it - 35mm adapters for example. I recently showed a few very non "video people" a vareity of clips on vimeo from either the gh2 or the 5d and they almost always selected the 5d as looking the best, which somewhat surprised me.

Cheers
 
mw5j1 said:
I find the 5d mark ii almost unusable unless it is a tight shallow dof shot.

I recently bought a mark 3 . full frame look, and simply using Canon lenses natively is awesome.
Click to expand...

Sorry to edit your quote, but why do find the 5DII unusable and the MK3 completely awesome. They have the same dof.
 
ROCKMORE said:
Sorry to edit your quote, but why do find the 5DII unusable and the MK3 completely awesome. They have the same dof.
Click to expand...

no problem. I meant that the mark 2 and t2i were unusable at wide deep dof shots due to the aliasing and moire.
 
For narrative short films/features that you plan on grading and putting up on the big screen, go with the GH2 as the hack gives you incredible PMW-F3 quality.

For live event shoots go with the T3i as the T3i/Magic Lantern combo is more reliable for live events than the GH2+Hack is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top