GH2 Do you own both Canon and Panasonic?

D

DevonH

Well-known member
Hey All,
I've started working on a few pro-bono productions locally to provide my portfolio with a few items (all of them for neat companies, I'll provide write ups when they're complete), and several of my "clients" have asked if I do photography (which is a whole other ball-game). The thought of offering both is appealing though, as most of the work would be simple head-shots and the like.

I'm considering picking up the 60d with kit lens and a speedlite to fulfill the requests I'm getting, and once a few of my design clients come through I'll fill out the kit with some additional lenses and accessories.

I have a GH1 that I planned on selling and using as the b-cam at weddings, but with the purchase of the 60d, I could make that my wedding a cam, with the GH2 running at the back (usually they would end up in two different movies, and when they would need to mix I could manage it). The low light sensitivity could be a major plus.

We have gone over the pros and cons of each cam, and in my opinion, I believe the GH2 is better for video (remember: in my opinion), but when it comes to stills, Canon obviously has the upper hand. However, I think that the 60d could certainly have it's uses for some productions, and that's part of my question set.

1. Do you believe the entire concept is foolish and I should just get a few nice lenses for the GH2 (I doubt my Vintage FDs will perform well for the type of sharp photo look I need).

2. Are there times when you pull out your Canon instead of your GH2?
 
I use my Canon t2i for stills and Gh2 (2 of them) for videos.

The t2i with my Tamron 17-50 and Canon 100mm f2 generally covers weddings and events... it is a fast proven workflow.

The jpegs from the Gh2 looks ... meh... haven't tried the raw pics though.

For video, it's no contest... gh2 all the way.

Having said that, I wouldn't run out and get a Canon 60D just yet. The Canon t4i might be so much better.
 
I think both systems offer advantages for video and I use both. But for photos, the GH2 doesn't look nearly as good.
 
I have the T3i, 7D, GH1 and GH2. The Panny's strength is video, but I've used both GH's for stills, mostly scenics, landscapes etc. The 14-140 is still better than anything available with that range in the EOS mount.

If I need to take a lot of stills, then it's the 7D. 8fps, very fast AF and that I have constant f2.8 zooms that cover me all the way from 11mm to 300mm. Battery life, and good flash capability are also important factors.

That said, I would not hesitate to use the GH1 or GH2 for stills if I have the right lens on it.

On the video side, the GH's are my goto, but when I need fast glass and high ISO, it's back to the Canon's - that may change when I get more fast glass for m43. I also find the somewhat softer look of the Canon's work well for some subjects like people.
 
5D and still heavily borrowing a GH2.

I think they can make a great team. Especially 5D for stills.
 
I just purchased a GH2, so now I'm running with a HPX-170, Canon 60D, and a GH2. How long that remains the case depends on what happens with the C300...
 
I also do this, a 7D and GH2. They both have strengths and weaknesses and can be good for different situations. I find myself going for the 7D more often because I feel I have more control over color rendition, but mostly I like having a video camera and a still camera. I end up using the Canon instead for a lot of jobs. I like the larger size, better control of colors and easier workflow thanks to the standard and correctly encoded video files. If I only bring one camera this one also gives me a lot more options, since I can use it for photos if needed.

That said, photography and video are not the same thing and you will have a learning curve.
 
Last edited:
free advice you're getting from an anonymous person on an internet forum...

IF budget is the issue here, then a T2i with a 50mm prime (the ultra cheap f/1.8 or the better (faster autofocus) f/1.4) will deliver outstanding portraits, identical to the 60D, if you know what you're doing. Traditionalists will argue that a 50mm is a bad portrait lens, and they're essentially correct, but an 85mm or 105mm on an APS-C gets challenging. You can always "squeeze" your 50mm portrait in post and/or shrink their nose a bit for more flattering portraits from a 50mm.

The point here being -- images from a 50mm prime on a T2i or T3i will be identical to a 60D -- at about half the cost.

Also, video head shots appear to be more pleasing from a softer Canon than the sharper GH2.

I can confirm that the most mediocre of Canon still images are better than the best of anything still image I've ever seen from a GH2.

Going the video route with GH2 cameras makes sense on a range of levels. A ton of tests remain before I can offer any definitive recommendations. The sharp images are nice, the stable high bitrates with the hack are a dream (the only reason I bought the camera) -- but the baked in Panasonic looks with the crushed blacks is an issue, awful highlights are a disaster, and the smaller sensor creates a range of issues spanning crop factor to low light. Also, at this very preliminary stage I'm suspecting that the Panasonic lenses are half of the problems people have associated with the GH2.

If waiting for better stuff coming this year isn't an option -- then my recommendation based on your post would be a T2i with a 50mm prime lens and a hacked GH2 with an assortment of vintage primes. If waiting for better stuff coming this year isn't an option -- then my recommendation based on your post would be a T2i with a 50mm prime lens and a hacked GH2 with an assortment of vintage primes.
 
I went from a T2i to a GH2/GH1 combo. Couldn't stand that the Canon's viewfinder and autofocus went away in video mode. And I wanted the flip-out LCD (this was before the T3i and 60D).

For stills, I crank up the color on the GHs (Dynamic film mode) and my jpegs 'pop' just like my Canon's used to ;-)

Budget permitting, I suggest you get a good 20mm or 25mm portrait lens and a Nissinhttp://www.adorama.com/NIDI466FT.html?kbid=66291 flash for the GH2 and accept the work. Your clients will be fine with it, you'll learn something new, and you won't be out a lot of money.

You're right, though, a 5DMkII would be nice...

Cheers and good luck with your decision,

Bill
 
I shoot a T3i and 7D as A and B cam with a GH2 as C-cam/inserts and it all works like a charm...

Noah
 
DevonH said:
Hey All, I've started working on a few pro-bono productions locally to provide my portfolio with a few items (all of them for neat companies, I'll provide write ups when they're complete), and several of my "clients" have asked if I do photography (which is a whole other ball-game). The thought of offering both is appealing though, as most of the work would be simple head-shots and the like. I'm considering picking up the 60d with kit lens and a speedlite to fulfill the requests I'm getting, and once a few of my design clients come through I'll fill out the kit with some additional lenses and accessories. I have a GH1 that I planned on selling and using as the b-cam at weddings, but with the purchase of the 60d, I could make that my wedding a cam, with the GH2 running at the back (usually they would end up in two different movies, and when they would need to mix I could manage it). The low light sensitivity could be a major plus.We have gone over the pros and cons of each cam, and in my opinion, I believe the GH2 is better for video (remember: in my opinion), but when it comes to stills, Canon obviously has the upper hand. However, I think that the 60d could certainly have it's uses for some productions, and that's part of my question set.1. Do you believe the entire concept is foolish and I should just get a few nice lenses for the GH2 (I doubt my Vintage FDs will perform well for the type of sharp photo look I need).2. Are there times when you pull out your Canon instead of your GH2?
Click to expand...
I use Nikon D700 for stills, but would not hesitate to use GH2 for portraits in controlled shoot with a pair of off-camera lights, one through an umbrella. The classic three point lighting scheme is very useful for both stills and video. Continuous light is easier to control than strobes. Vintage fd 50mm would be good focal length on gh2 for head and shoulders. Stopping down about two stops should yield sharp images. That focus zoom aid is a joy to use with manual lenses. 20-28mm lenses are good for full body portraits. All current interchangable lens cameras are good enough IMHO. I would concentrate on lighting, composition and good mood during shoot rather than worry about gh2 still image performance. It is very nice between 160-800 iso, especially RAW images.
 
Thanks for all the great input guys! After doing a lot of research I've chosen to pick up a t3i. I understand that the 60d is more pro oriented, but for my uses it will fit perfectly. I'll compliment it with the Tamron 17-50 and kit lens to start.

Kholi, I can bring them together with a 5dtoRGB conversion, correct?
 
There's been some discussions around here about creating custom picture styles to match footage in video taken from both. Nothing out yet, but there are some people who appear to be working on it.

The one thing I noticed right away when I got my GH2, is that the colors look different, even at the same white balance as a Canon side by side. Combining footage requires a bit of CC skills at the moment, but I'm hoping it will get easier.

Meanwhile, I love my Canon too much to give it up for stills. I have the GH2 for video work, and the T2i gets used for photo gigs as well as around-the-house personal use. To be honest, I thought the smaller size of the GH2 would make it a more appealing camera for my personal use, but it really gets left in the bag reserved for pro gigs. The T2i comes with me everywhere.
 
I'm more than happy with the stills from the GH2. Not much better or worse than a T2i IMHO. I think a GH2 would definitely suffice for controlled-lighting headshots for pro-bono work. At the very least, it would help you learn more about how to get the best out of the tools you already have.

The only other camera I would consider getting is a full frame model like the Canon 5D for increased FOV.
 
DevonH said:
Thanks for all the great input guys! After doing a lot of research I've chosen to pick up a t3i. I understand that the 60d is more pro oriented, but for my uses it will fit perfectly. I'll compliment it with the Tamron 17-50 and kit lens to start.

Kholi, I can bring them together with a 5dtoRGB conversion, correct?
Click to expand...

Yeah, same workflow. What you'll have to do is experiment with profiles, though. I suggest steering clear of Cinestyle and just using a combination of 5DtoRGB and maybe the Neutral profile.

Do some tests! I will as well when I get a chance, with the 5D.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top