D7000 buyers remorse

Wow guys I go away for a night and get two more pages of replies. Thank you.

I should probably explain my situation better. By day I'm a pro video guy working salary at a web media company. I shoot mostly corporate talking heads video (real background and green screen.) But I've also shot some local TV commercials, hour and half long events and various other types of shoots. Our projects range anywhere from a few thousand dollars to over hundred thousand dollars. Most of them in $10-$15k range. Those shoots usually include myself, my audio guy and a project manager. Sometimes a director but usually I'm doing that job as well. I also do 90% of the post work and pretty much live in after effects. I've been doing this professionally for 5 years. Previous to this I was a hobbyist making indie films including many short films and one completed feature film under my directing belt.

So yes, video is my trade.

That said, photography has been one of my passions for the last 17 years. I even won a couple national awards. I've also done some photography professionally as my job calls for it. But all of this has been location photography, headshots and product photography. All of it using hot lights and available light. I don't know how to shoot flash photography. In the photography I've done both personally and professionally I've never had a need for it. But I really want to learn.

For two and half years at my current employer I worked with a guy a couple years younger than me who did most of our client photography. He used his own gear. About $15K worth of Canon equipment. He did weddings on the side and typically charges around $2500 for a package. He had very little interest in video at all. In fact I helped him test of the video features on his 5D2 and his 7D. He had been doing weddings for a couple years previous to working at my employer and he left us about 8 months ago to do weddings full time freelance. I'm still in contact with him and he's doing great. Getting a ton of referrals and as a result a ton of work.

He taught me a few things about flash photography using Alien Bee's and Speedlites. In fact nowadays he uses only a few speedlites for all his wedding shoots. He doesn't even pull out the alien bee's anymore. But only some of that stuck with me because at the time I didn't have an SLR or speedlites of my own.

I myself would never attempt to shoot both video and stills at a wedding. Unless I had a decent size crew with me and I was only directing the whole thing. In fact I'm really not all that interested in weddings to begin with. I have shot a couple wedding videos years ago for free and it was stressful. I'd rather stick with corporate work.
As a photographer I wouldn't charge $2500 for a wedding. I've never done a wedding photo shoot so I would probably do a couple for free and work my way up the ladder. I'm not against the idea of doing photography for weddings eventually when my strobe skills get to that point. But I don't really care much for wedding videos.

The only reason I asked the questions I asked about the GH2 is because I know weddings can be fast paced and the gear needs to be accessible and can't slow you down. Basically I was trying to ask "does the Gh2 have a fast enough workflow for a pro photographer?" Because I've noticed that the D7000 has plenty of buttons and knobs for changing settings quickly like pro video cameras do.

Basically I don't make a lot of money where I currently work. I do good work but they don't have much interest investing in our department so my future there is limited. I wanted to pick up a camera for my own personal photography and video pleasure as well as one I could use for side work to make some extra coin and hopefully one day go freelance myself. I don't want to limit myself to just video work or just photo work. I wanted to be able to take both kinds of work. Because I do both professionally right now as it is.
 
Whoa....nice "semi" biography.

With that said...I think the GH-2s are more menu driven type of cameras vs the Nikons/Canons. So that might be something that could slow you down in that type of environment.
 
. But I don't really care much for wedding videos.
Smart man ;)

The only reason I asked the questions I asked about the GH2 is because I know weddings can be fast paced and the gear needs to be accessible and can't slow you down. Basically I was trying to ask "does the Gh2 have a fast enough workflow for a pro photographer?" Because I've noticed that the D7000 has plenty of buttons and knobs for changing settings quickly like pro video cameras do.

Basically I don't make a lot of money where I currently work. I do good work but they don't have much interest investing in our department so my future there is limited. I wanted to pick up a camera for my own personal photography and video pleasure as well as one I could use for side work to make some extra coin and hopefully one day go freelance myself. I don't want to limit myself to just video work or just photo work. I wanted to be able to take both kinds of work. Because I do both professionally right now as it is.
It sounds like you have given this this a good deal of thought and have a plan. Based on your statements here, I think maybe you've answered your own question. I think you're set for photography with your D7000. If you're planning to do weddings too, I think you should either consider adding the GH2 for the longer video record times, or get a HD Video camera, which may make the most sense.
 
Yes,....and I'm trying very hard to look away .....but if footage keeps coming up like that then I think PD's delay on delivering my GH-2 would be a good thing.

Heh.....I'm trying to "avert my eyes too". :) I have to sell some cameras before I get another one (not money....just the principle...GF1, GH1, T2i, S95, LX5, FZ35....gotta get rid of some before I get more)

That said....I'm in the EXACT same place. I shoot photography and videography....and I'm stuck between the GH2 and the D7000. I fear that I will end up owning BOTH. D7000 for photography is a no-brainer. For video...the D7000 just seems a little "unknown/untested" here on our forum. So....I'm not sure it will take care of all of my needs. (In fact, I know it won't, no 60P...and ETC mode looks amazing for wildlife.) The GH2 for video looks to be...(also)...a no brainer, for video. Paired with the F.95....it looks pretty amazing. That said....there's some stuff about M4/3 that just BUGS me...it's all fine and workable....but just not my fav. Anywho.....good discussion. D7000 vs GH2 (when photos and videos are a high priority)....good question. Looks like my answer for now is: BOTH.
 
I have an AF100 now, but before that, I used a 7D for video. If the AF100 had not come along I'd have gotten the GH2 for video to overcome the moire and aliasing. If the D7000 has the same issues with colored moire as the Canons I would steer clear of it. Mainly because if you are shooting anything that cannot be redone, colored moire is an ABSOLUTE pain to remove. Worse, at least on any Canon DSLR, you cannot see the moire in 1080p unless you view it externally somehow. You CANNOT see it on the internal LCD, too low a resolution, and video playback doesn't allow zoom. I've had the colored moire destroy shots. I've seen comparisons with the 7D and GH1 even that showed how much worse the moire is on the 7D. And it's no lie.

All that said, however, for Photography, I didn't sell my D90 because I think it works faster and better than the 7D. I've taken the same picture with both the 7D and D90 and not matter what, I always get a better image to my liking on the D90. Same thing for astrophotography. I hooked up the D90 and 7D to a telescope and the D90 is SIGNIFICANTLY better taking the same shots.

Ultimately, you are going to have to decide what is more important to you, video or stills as no camera excels at both. At least, not in my opinion. Even now, my AF100 is not for stills and I like Canon glass so I have not sold my 7D yet. If I do, it will be body only as I want the glass for my AF100.
 
....deciions....decisions.....decisions... Reminds me of just over a year ago when I was flippin my mind all over the place.
 
Ian since you switched from the 7D to gh1 I assume you want the camera more for video? if that's the case I think you might enjoy the gh2 more. When I tried the d7000 I found it even more fickle than the 7D in some regards. But if you want awesome stills the d7000 is pretty sick.
 
Yeah I think you're right on all that. There were a few things I missed about the 7D but the GH-1 solved a lot of my needs (especially with the hack). I'm in the GH-2 camp all the way right now. It's everything the GH-1 was and much more. As nice as some of the images I've seen from the D7000 are I feel I would be taking several steps backwards (in terms of shooting video) if I went that route. The lack of manual controls, no LCD, short video time limit and shockingly the color moire I've seen on some videos are what's got me running scared. But when it's shot right....man...it looks right.

....then there's that mirror...UGHH!!
 
Haha yeah PITA mirror. There's aperture workarounds for the d7000 and you can get some nice footage for sure with the right amount of massaging. One day most of these points will be moot. One day.
 
If it helps, GH2's stills ability really surprised me, better than I expected.
What's great about GH2, everything you shoot looks OK on LCD or EVF but when viewing it in full quality on computer it's just great, with the Canons, at least for video, it kind of was the other way around.
 
As an owner of both the 7D and the GH2 I am keeping the 7D for stills and even for some video...

The GH2 IQ on images is sad compared, I can't depend on the quality for my Stock work, it is like getting ten years back and hoping for some low noise. The chroma noise blotches on the shadows makes many images unusable, NR apps jut obliterate too much detail to be a solution. Not all is bad tho, the 20mm 1.7 lens for portraits produces pin sharp results with amazing color and detail in the right light. As a portrait camera with shallow DoF it is a beautiful machine. For more general imaging I can't recommend it.

The GH2 dissappointed heavily in 1080i 60 at 17mbits. The artifacts and lack of detail in the shadows/motion is disheartening. If it gets hacked it will be an incredible video substitute. The 24p is much better but it is still lower quality than the canon for many uses like low light and motion, you just cant fight the extra megabits with a more efficient codec. The 7D codec at even 30p 1080 kills the 24p 24mbit of the GH2. The 7D Canon with a shallow lens just retains shadows better. The codec's fault again in part of the GH2. The Canon codec is encoding artifacts but it is not generating many warm type edge artifacts like the GH2 does. If shooting 1080i 60 on the GH2 considerit a 720 cam because the down-scaling will help a lot with the quality.

A Hack is needed but clearly this isn't a replacement cam for all situations,we need a hack for higher bit-rates.

The GH2 in daylight and studio light is untouchable, the quality and sharpness of the video is miles better than the 7D especially in landscapes. In Water and fast motion I have managed to break the codec much easier than on the Canon.


So for Pics the 7D or D7000
Video GH2

It is only a matter of time we get the canon's and Nikon's to get better video, the GH2 is an in between step cam for me and If a hack comes in it will be a keeper for many years.

It is a shame that Panasonic left the GH2 with a crippled 17mbits on 1080when you get 24p at 24mbits. Only a Hack can save that mode IMO.

Good luck!
 

Wrong. Depends on what you want to do, but it's better in many aspects than uber-pro cameras from 5 years ago.

3. No built-in wireless flash support. Slow flash x-sync speed... gawd only 1/160s. Oly has better flash support.

So? Do you use strobes? It's very rare that I have a situation where I need anything faster than 160.
The fact that it has a hotshoe opens all all pro options - primarily the industry standad: remote strobes fired via Pocket Wizards



Yes. It's your work that matters, not the camera. BUT if you're charging $2500 make sure you have full redundancy.

8. No. Poor flash support.

Again:
Do you actually use strobes? It's very rare that I have a situation where I need anything faster than 160.
The fact that it has a hotshoe opens all all pro options - primarily the industry standad: remote strobes fired via Pocket Wizards
 
Last edited:
Ergonomically the only ones that come close are the Canon 60D's...but then again the image is just like the T2i/7D.

True. The aliasing on the 60D (and I imagine the 7D and T2i) is brutal.
I have a post here that compares (non-scientifically) the 60D to a GH1: HERE
 
True. The aliasing on the 60D (and I imagine the 7D and T2i) is brutal.
I have a post here that compares (non-scientifically) the 60D to a GH1: HERE

Perfect example. Look at the rainbowing in the aliasing on the glasses. Rotoscoping is SO MUCH harder when edges do this for me.
 
iHartVideo, yes I did practice strobist. Not with the expensive Pocket Wizards. With Chinese cheap wireless trigger. Sure I read Light Science and Magic book. I was into strobist forums, too. But not many strobists were using GH1 for some serious strobist work.

http://www.flickr.com/groups/strobist/discuss/72157623611116323/

If it's a dark room, sure 1/160s works fine. The only light sources are from studio lightings.

But when it's bright daylight, the relatively slow sync speed do affect the overall result. Have you been to strobist.com and ever find anyone posting strobist pictures by GH1? There may be just a few if there's any. Go to vimeo.com, and there are many videos done by GH1. That tells a lot.
 
For weddings on the cheap, I would buy Lumix GH2 and a used Canon 5D (Mk1). We have excellent video and stills right there, for about $3000, including a lens each.

Actually, if I were charging $2.5K most Saturdays, I'd buy about another $5K worth of stuff, upgrade that 5D to a Mk2, which I'd expect to see from a good wedding photographer, a 24-70 f2.8 L, and a Vinten Vision blue tripod, Zaza slider dolly, a couple of led kino-flos and pay a good photo/video buddy to help out each week.
 
The sync speed is limited by the mechanical shutter. Currently Nikon and Canon make the best mechanical shutters. Other players like Samsung, Panasonic, Olympus, Sony can never catch up to Canon and Nikon on that. So they removed the mirror, implemented more video features, and blah blah.

About a year ago I got excited to hear rumors about "global shutter" or shutterless technology from Panasonic. The global shutter could push the sync speed to 1/1000s. No more mechanical shutter sound. Really freaking awesome. But it seems not possible in near future. Hopefully next decade.

My friend bought D90 and he did awesome strobist shots. I heard D7000 improved D90. The consensus seems D7000 for photo and GH2 for video.
 
Mike - You've received a lot of good advice here, and I can't add much to the discussion of flash sync, etc. -- but I read your bio and took a look at your blog and, as a filmmaker, you may end up frustrated with the fixed LCD, marginal autofocus in video mode and the shooting time & frame rate limits imposed by the Nikon. I come at this from a video perspective, and although people are doing great video work with the mirrored cameras, I have found the lack of video basics frustrating (I was a T2i guy before the GH2).

Even though the GH2 is not the premier still camera in the world, it is a joy to shoot both stills and video with it, and pros are using it to do some good work.

Bottom line for me: no more frustration (except in the rain -- I would kill for D7000/7D/K5-type weather sealing!) :-)
 
Yeah there is a ton of great advice here and various opinions. That's what I love about this place. To be honest I thought I had made up my mind to keep the D7000 but I'm still torn. I still find myself coming back here reading about the GH cameras.

At this point. I'm "considering" an extreme shift. I'm considering turning in my $2000 D7K kit and just picking up one of these stock GH1's for $375. In doing so forgetting about any side work for now and just focusing on hobby work like studio portraits and short internet films. Then putting the rest of the money into a savings account for a rainy day.

As is stands it seems like no one can get their hands on the GH2 right now and I decided I don't want a Canon. So I could pick up a GH1 right now just to have a camera to fool around with and still have money in the bank to pick up a better camera if some side work pops up or I finally decide which direction I want to go in.

At least that's what I'm thinking right now. The stock GH1 should be good enough for short films that "air" on the internet and hobby photography right?
 
+1. I think its smarter to focus on either photo or video, but not both at the same time.

GH2 is good enough for indoor strobist for hobby. At low ISO, it should give good details. But my main focus is video, too.
 
Back
Top