Correct me if I'm Wrong, but I am going with the 60D over the GH2

J

jrod81

Veteran
And here is why:
While the GH2 is appealing because of the "no file size limit" and the audio meters on the screen, those are the only two things I can get excited about. The file size is a huge deal to me, but I have to think that Canon will do this in its next release in order to compete and leapfrog Panasonic. Ultimately, I am going with the 60d for two reasons:
1. To start building up a lens kit (and yes I realize other brand lenses will work, but I have had some bad luck with adapters in the past so I want to just use Canon or offbrands made for Canon- no Nikons w/ adapters for me)
2. Better in Low Light
3. Easy to obtain a shallower dof
I don't like that the GH2 is a 2x crop (meaning a 25mm is equal to a 50mm whereas the 60d is 1.6x crop). I can't find many lenses that are fast enough for low light for the GH2.
Now, I am terrified of making the wrong decision so please add to this thread and tell me if I am making the completely wrong choice. Need to make a decision by mid Dec.
 
Hi jrod81,

I agree with you. I actually have a GH13 and 60D. Love the GH13 for what I have been able to get out of it with the hack. But I love my Canon lenses and the beautiful shots I can get with my 70-200mm f2.8 for interviews. Above all, I am amazed by how well the 60D performs in low light with a Canon 24mm f/1.4. I chose to get the 60D for that reason: canon lenses, low light capacity, flip out screen. For me the only downside is the 12 minute limit, but I can work around it. As for sound, I record to my Zoom H4N and use Plural Eyes to sync in post.
 
Used my 60D properly for the first time today (along with new tokina 11-16 and new 70-200 f.2.8L mk II) and am very happy - hope you will be too!
 
gh2 has full HD out through HDMI, it has vastly improved aliasing a moire, it's codec is beating the hacked gh1. You can pick up cheap canon to m4/3 adapters and use all your canon glass, now only manual as you will loose AF and aperture control, but there are some great cheap canon FD's out there the 50mm 1.4 is great, I have a 20mm 2.8 I love. On a pure sensor size issue yes the 60d would make sense but in every other aspect (possibly even low light) the gh2 is optimized for video production can exceed or match all the features of the 60d.

Now this is just my opinion but it would be A big mistake to buy a 60d instead of a gh2 when looking at them from a pure video point of view, now if you want to wait and see what comes out do just that wait, don't get the 60d until you see what canon is offering next and when, otherwise I would strongly suggest getting the GH2, I have a GH1 and K-X and 550d, the GH1 blows them all away in quality and features for video. the choice is yours have fun and remember no matter what camera you get there is no right or wrong decision, it's just about learning the craft and having a good time.
 
I'm a big Canon person (own a 7D) and I own some very expensive Canon glass. The GH2 however, is better than the Canon DSLRs right now. The 60D was a HUGE DISAPPOINTMENT to me because it was the 4th iteration of their DSLRs, yet it had the exact same problems -- bad moire and basically useless 720p for any deep focus shot. Canon needs to get their act together and take the lead again.

With that said. IMO, Canon has far superior glass than Panasonic. I know that everyone says Panny can use any lens, but it does not have the fast IS zoom lenses that Canon has. I would take the ability to use modern, native Canon lenses (which are the best) and old Nikons with adapters; over the GH2's ability to use any lens (except EOS with aperture control). It would take a long time, if ever for m43 to catch Canon in the lens department because Canon has such a lead in the still photography world (ie. serious revenue) which allows them to invest in research to make the best lenses. Panasonic does not have that, so in all honesty, their native lenses will probably never be as good.

Also, the 2x crop on Panny is not ideal. I work in TV in LA, and almost every studio who shoots DSLRs use Canon. I really think it's because the APS-C crop factor is identical to 35mm motion picture cameras, and many long time DPs obviously have a bias towards that. M43 was originally designed as a consumer format, which it is. So is APS-C, but at least Canon had the forsight to make it match 35mm motion pic cameras, which makes it ideal for video -- on purpose, or coincidence? Not sure. Let's say there were 2 identical cameras, and 1 had 1.6x crop, and the other had 2x crop. I'm pretty sure most DPs would prefer the 1.6x since it's been the standard for decades.

With that said, the GH2 is the better video camera and Canon needs to release something soon. I'm personally going to wait it out. I've spent a ton of money on glass, so I need to chill on the major purchases. The GH2 is kick butt right now though, and Canon will lose customers until they step up. Their silence is killing me.
 
S. Matthews said:
no matter what camera you get there is no right or wrong decision, it's just about learning the craft and having a good time.
Click to expand...
Very true. It will be a very long time before you use either camera to their full capacity. I went with the 60D for filmmaking mainly because the sensor size is almost exactly 35mm academy size. The 12 minute limit is no problem - it's equivalent to 1000 ft of 35 mm film. And the zoom H4n. Dual sound with clapperboards is half the fun.
 
I think you're making the right choice, but that's because I happen to be making the same choice (sticking with Canon) :) Everyone has their own needs and preferences so it's hard for us to say what is right or wrong for you.

It's true that the GH2 is more video optimized at the moment. If that's what you need now for say paying jobs, strongly consider it. But if you're only doing this for fun and learning right now, I think going with Canon is a better choice in the long run. Canon basically finished putting video in all of their cameras in the last two years (except the 1Ds4 which has been MIA). They're now at a point where it "feels" like they're poised to unleash second generation video. The 60D was designed on the same basic first generation video architecture as the 5D, 7D, T2i, etc. and used the same Digic 4 chip so that's why the major issues like moire wasn't fixed. But we did see that Canon made steady improvements like put in manual exp control and standard frame rates in all models. They even put a tilt screen in the 60D.

My thinking is that the APS-C/FF world of Canon/Nikon/Sony is where the future lies because most of the volume is here and that's where all the lenses are. Even in the video camera side, Sony is building up a whole line of Super35mm cameras. Like the other posters said, you can put other lenses on a M43 camera, but then they become totally manual. Also, I can live with the 1.6X crop of lenses compared to FF, but 2X is a bit too much for me. Also, like you, I like using the camera branded lenses because they're made for that brand and could benefit from new features in the future (say Canon finds a way to do phase detect AF in video or makes a line of video lenses that does this like in their broadcast lenses).
 
That 1.6-crop to 2.0-crop comparison is for 4:3 images. The two cameras will have fairly similar crops when shooting 16:9 (because the GH2 maintains the same diagonal in 16:9 mode, whereas the Canon crops the 4:3 area to achieve 16:9)
 
GrahamH said:
That 1.6-crop to 2.0-crop comparison is for 4:3 images. The two cameras will have fairly similar crops when shooting 16:9 (because the GH2 maintains the same diagonal in 16:9 mode, whereas the Canon crops the 4:3 area to achieve 16:9)
Click to expand...

I could be wrong, but I don't think this is correct. I redid the FOV calculations and I still came up with roughly those crop factors (using equations from here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angle_of_view )

Even if you were to try to match the diagonal FOV between the 3:2 DSLR sensors and the 4:3 M43 sensor, the difference is just 1 mm in focal length.

Also, the horizontal FOV is what really matters as to how "wide" your view is and since all these cameras are just cropping the tops and bottoms to get 16:9, the horizontal FOV still depends on how wide the sensor is and the larger sensors are just wider. Here are my calcs:

 
The GH2 extends its horizontal dimension when in 16:9 mode - that's my point. I'll hunt for a link.

Edit: While the Panasonic GH2's 4:3 ratio frame yields a ~16-megapixel image that's 4,608 x 3,456 .... its 16:9 ratio yields a ~14-megapixel image that measures 4,976 x 2,800. The illustration shows how the camera's aspect ratios are arranged on a nominally 4:3 aspect ratio sensor. http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/DMCGH2/DMCGH2A.HTM

So yes, I exaggerated when I said the 16:9 modes are 'fairly similar'. In 16:9 mode the GH2 has a crop factor of about 1.85X, and a horizontal sensor dimension of about 19.4mm (as compared to the 18mm suggested in the chart a couple of posts back). Significantly smaller than the 60D, although not as different as 1.6 vs 2.0 would suggest.

Edit 2: Here's a useful Table: http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...nd-CCF-Chart&p=2147811&viewfull=1#post2147811 GH2 = AF100
 
Last edited:
Thanks for that Graham, I see what they're doing now. Here is another site that explains it: http://fourthirds-user.com/2009/04/the_biggest_four_thirds_sensor_yet.php

I tried to see how much of a difference this makes so I calculated the maximum sensor width possible, using the 4/3 standard 21.63mm image circle ( http://www.four-thirds.org/en/fourthirds/whitepaper.html ). For 16:9 this came out to be 18.9mm. Then I calculated the focal length needed to match the same FOV of a 50mm lens on the FF35 format at 16:9. It turned out to be 26.3 mm (instead of 25mm). So the difference with this slightly larger sensor that Panasonic is using is pretty small.
 
literally sick at my stomach over this... i am making this purchase for a law firm that i just was hired as video manager. i know there is no "wrong decision" here but buyer's remorse is my worst enemy. now these things are making me rethink it all:
GH2 pros:
1. no recording time limit
2. auto focus (i need to find out if this is going to be strong enough for live event shooting)
3. it has an option to zoom in (like the canon's) and then record that image at 1080p... this does wonders for lenses
4. less moire and aliasing issues
5. audio metering on screen
 
The deal basically is, will you be able to get decent lenses?
If so, get the GH2, If not, get the 60d/7d/t2i.

Personnaly I'm going for the 60d. The crop factor just doesn't cut it for me.
I already own 2 vintage lenses (50mm 1.8 and 70-230 F/4) which I previously used on a Canon 1000d.

I'm hoping that this sunday I'll be getting a 2nd hand 60d with 420 EX II flash. Because I like both photography and film.

The GH2 really is an awesome camera. It has less moire and aliasing issues and has on-screen audio metering (even though you'll probably be recording with a zoom h1 of h4n.)

But I just like the 60d more, and in the future I'll probably will be sticking with Canon.
 
jrod81 said:
literally sick at my stomach over this... i am making this purchase for a law firm that i just was hired as video manager. i know there is no "wrong decision" here but buyer's remorse is my worst enemy. now these things are making me rethink it all:
GH2 pros:
1. no recording time limit
2. auto focus (i need to find out if this is going to be strong enough for live event shooting)
3. it has an option to zoom in (like the canon's) and then record that image at 1080p... this does wonders for lenses
4. less moire and aliasing issues
5. audio metering on screen
Click to expand...

Heres my take on your situation jrod81,

Your background is filmmaking, thats what you aspire, but noting that your employer is a lawfirm, I think theyre after that you document a lot of stuff that has "legal" implications.
Having said that, I don't think they're into the cinematic, DOF thingy that us here in DVXusers are 'obsessing' about.

They probably need stuff covered and documented. Probably even doing a docu style material.

In short, your better served with a regular ENG type cameras, that will give you proper onboard audio, no messing around with external recorder and syncing.
HMC150, EX1 type cams can serve your employers needs well.
Long record times is essential for your job also.

The DSLR is something that YOU would want for your own.
 
Last edited:
Ted makes a few good points, it really depends what you will be using the camera for, even if the GH2 gives a "better" quality picture it doesn't really matter. The 5DII, 7D, 550D has been around for a while now, every single music video currently being play on our national equivalent to MTV has been filmed on the 5DII or 7D & it's brilliant stuff. We even have local TV dramas being broadcast that was shot on the 5DII. Your camera is the first step, lighting, art direction, audio all play very important roles. I really don't think you will regret buying a 60D over a GH2 as long as you spend the time to produce quality videos with the camera no one cares about the camera.

We filmed a commercial DVD production the last two day with two EX1's, two Canon 550D's and a 7D. The quality you get out of those tiny 550D's is amazing and in many shots looked better than the EX1 but I'd still rely on the EX1 for fast paced event work. The only thing I hate about DSLR's is how difficult it is to operate them compared to a proper video camera. Buy a camera that will make money for you, the 60D will do that as will the GH2, you wont regret either purchase.
 
All I can say is that I've loved my 7D since the day I bought it, but I think the GH2 is a camera that shoots better footage. The biggest deciding factor in my opinion is how do you feel about having to re-shoot a scene that you find out has too much moire in it. Canon has done NOTHING to enhance their moire/aliasing and rolling shutter in any DSLR they have released. Now, this wouldn't be so bad if I could actually detect the Moire in camera, but you cannot. Or, I have to use a full HD external display to see it. If you are shooting in a law firm, I can only imagine the hell you are going to have with suit jackets. I've had some NASTY moire.

The thing is, I can make amazing video on my 7D, but at the same time, I end up losing a lot of shots that I would have LOVED to use because of say, a brick building in the back, a car grill nearby, an air condition vent, patterns on anything. I had once scene go full rainbow on a couch that I never saw anything in camera with it. We were shocking with how bad it is. We shoot with 7D, 5D, 1D and t2i and all of them perform the same on this front.

The ONE issue that I will agree with you is on lenses. When I pre-ordered my AF100, I had the same thoughts as you. I have a plethera of Canon lenses that I love that have no manual controls. The one saving grace is that birger is about to release an electronic mount that will allow Canon lenses work on the AF100/GH2 by translation of their electronic signals. This was the win for me.

I spent some time looking at the actual recorded files from the GH2 that many early adopters have posted. I've studied them, pushed them around a bit, and have been very impressed by them. So much so that, even with the lens issue, I just cannot recommend the 60D. It represents the same old technology that Canon has continued to put out. The GH2 has a next gen sensor (and it shows).

I hear all this about the crop factor, but why would you continue to compare a Full Frame sensor to a video camera when no one in the film world has been using Full Frame that much at all. Sure, the 5D has it, but I've used one and was not impressed. It's too much. S35 is the sweet spot. And at that, the crop from S35 is something like 1.18. Go spend some time with a zoom lens and do the math, the difference is really not as much as you think. I've done this. My 30mm F1.4 translates to roughly a 25mm lens on the AF100/GH2, and that is pretty close focal lengths to me.

Now don't get me wrong, if Canon had an AF100 competitor that didn't have moire/aliasing like the 5D/iD/t2i/60D I'd be all over that. Clearly, they've got a problem they've not been able to fix yet. And get this, I've seen it in other sensors from them too, just not as vivid. I made my HV30 create rainbow as well! From the history of Canon that a lot of people talk about, it doesn't sound like anything will be coming too soon. Regardless, I plan on staying mostly Canon lenses with the birger adapter.

My two stops anyways :)
 
jrod81 said:
literally sick at my stomach over this... i am making this purchase for a law firm that i just was hired as video manager. i know there is no "wrong decision" here but buyer's remorse is my worst enemy. now these things are making me rethink it all:
GH2 pros:
1. no recording time limit
2. auto focus (i need to find out if this is going to be strong enough for live event shooting)
3. it has an option to zoom in (like the canon's) and then record that image at 1080p... this does wonders for lenses
4. less moire and aliasing issues
5. audio metering on screen
Click to expand...

Depending on the type of work you'd be doing for the law firm, recording time limits may be an important consideration for *you*
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top